International Technology Research Institutescienceus.org/wtec/docs/ebm.pdf · WTEC Panel on ENVIRONMENTALLY BENIGN MANUFACTURING FINAL REPORT April 2001 Timothy G. Gutowski (Panel

WTEC Panel Report on

ENVIRONMENTALLY BENIGN MANUFACTURING

Timothy G. Gutowski (Panel Chair)Cynthia F. Murphy (Panel Co-chair)David T. AllenDiana J. BauerBert BrasThomas S. PiwonkaPaul S. ShengJohn W. SutherlandDeborah L. ThurstonEgon E. Wolff

April 2001

International Technology Research InstituteR.D. Shelton, Director

Geoffrey M. Holdridge, WTEC Division Director and Series Editor

4501 North Charles StreetBaltimore, Maryland 21210-2699

International Technology Research Institute World Technology (WTEC) Division

WTEC PANEL ON ENVIRONMENTALLY BENIGN MANUFACTURING (EBM)TECHNOLOGIES

Sponsored by the National Science Foundation and the Department of Energy of the United States government.

Timothy G. Gutowski (Panel Chair)Professor of Mechanical EngineeringMassachusetts Institute of TechnologyRoom 35-234Cambridge, MA 02139

Cynthia F. Murphy (Panel Co-chair)Center for Energy and Environmental Resources (R7100)University of Texas at Austin10100 Burnet Rd., Bldg 133Austin, Texas 78758

David T. AllenDept. of Chemical EngineeringUniversity of Texas at AustinAustin, TX 78712-1062

Diana J. BauerAAAS Fellow at EPANational Center for Environmental Research (NCER)1200 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W.8722RWashington, DC 20460

Bert BrasSystems Realization LaboratoryThe George W. Woodruff School of MechanicalEngineeringGeorgia Institute of TechnologyAtlanta, Georgia 30332-0405

Thomas S. PiwonkaUniv. of Alabama/MCTC106 Bevill Bldg., 7th Ave.PO Box 870201Tuscaloosa, AL 35487-0201

Paul S. ShengAssociate PrincipalMcKinsey and Co., Inc.111 Congress Avenue, Suite 2100Austin, TX 78701

John W. SutherlandDept of Mechanical EngineeringsMichigan Technological University1400 Townsend DriveHoughton, Michigan 49931

Deborah L. ThurstonUniv. of Illinois—Urbana-Champaign117 Transportation B, MC 238104 S. MathewsUrbana, IL 61801

Egon E. WolffCaterpillar, Inc.Technical Center / KP.O. Box 1875Peoria, IL 61656-1875

INTERNATIONAL TECHNOLOGY RESEARCH INSTITUTE

World Technology (WTEC) Division

WTEC at Loyola College (previously known as the Japanese Technology Evaluation Center, JTEC) provides assessments offoreign research and development in selected technologies under a cooperative agreement with the National Science Foundation(NSF). Loyola’s International Technology Research Institute (ITRI), R.D. Shelton, Director, is the umbrella organization forWTEC. Elbert Marsh, Deputy Assistant Director for Engineering at NSF’s Engineering Directorate, is NSF Program Directorfor WTEC. Several other U.S. government agencies provide support for the program through NSF.

WTEC’s mission is to inform U.S. scientists, engineers, and policymakers of global trends in science and technology in amanner that is timely, credible, relevant, efficient and useful. WTEC assessments cover basic research, advanced development,and applications. Panels of typically six technical experts conduct WTEC assessments. Panelists are leading authorities in theirfield, technically active, and knowledgeable about U.S. and foreign research programs. As part of the assessment process,panels visit and carry out extensive discussions with foreign scientists and engineers in their labs.

The ITRI staff at Loyola College help select topics, recruit expert panelists, arrange study visits to foreign laboratories, organizeworkshop presentations, and finally, edit and disseminate the final reports.

Dr. R.D. SheltonITRI DirectorLoyola CollegeBaltimore, MD 21210

Mr. Geoff HoldridgeWTEC Division DirectorLoyola CollegeBaltimore, MD 21210

Dr. George GamotaITRI Associate Director17 Solomon Pierce RoadLexington, MA 02173

WTEC Panel on

ENVIRONMENTALLY BENIGN MANUFACTURING

FINAL REPORT

April 2001

Timothy G. Gutowski (Panel Chair)Cynthia F. Murphy (Panel Co-chair)David T. AllenDiana J. BauerBert BrasThomas S. PiwonkaPaul S. ShengJohn W. SutherlandDeborah L. ThurstonEgon E. Wolff

ISBN 1-883712-61-0This document was sponsored by the National Science Foundation (NSF) and the Department of Energy of the U.S.government under NSF Cooperative Agreement ENG-9707092, awarded to the International Technology ResearchInstitute at Loyola College in Maryland. The government has certain rights to this material. Any opinions, findings, andconclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect theviews of the United States government, the authors’ parent institutions, or Loyola College.

ABSTRACT

This report reviews the status of “environmentally benign manufacturing” (EBM) technologies, applications,and policies in Europe and Japan in comparison to those in the United States. Topics covered include metalsand metal manufacturing, polymers, automotive applications, electronics, and energy-related issues. Inaddition to reviewing specific technologies and applications in the above areas, the report covers broaderissues of government policies affecting environmental issues in manufacturing, corporate strategies andvision with respect to these issues, economic drivers influencing the development of EBM, and relevantresearch infrastructure. The panel’s findings include the following: Europe leads in most governmentalactivities, Japan in industrial activities, and the results for research and development are mixed. The UnitedStates leads in financial and legal liability concerns, water conservation, decreased industrial releases to airand water, and research in polymers and long term electronics, but follows in all other areas. In the area ofuniversity educational activities, and both industry and government sponsorship of these, it is clear thatEurope leads, followed by the United States and then Japan. Overall, therefore, the United States ranks thirdbehind Europe and Japan. Additional findings are outlined in the panel’s executive summary.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to thank the U.S. government sponsors of this study: the National Science Foundation and theDepartment of Energy. Special thanks are due to our sponsor representatives who traveled with the panel inJapan and Europe: Delcie Durham (NSF), K.P. Rajurkar (NSF), and Fred Thompson (NSF). I would alsolike to extend thanks to our DOE sponsor Toni Marechaux, especially for her help with the U.S. reviewworkshop. We are very much indebted to all of our panel members, who are due credit for their majorcontributions of time and intellect. It was both an honor and a pleasure to work with this group. Finally, weare extremely grateful to all of our hosts in Japan and Europe, and to the participants in the U.S. reviewworkshop, for sharing their activities and insights with us.

Geoffrey M. Holdridge, WTEC Division Director and Series Editor

International Technology Research Institute (ITRI)R. D. Shelton, Principal Investigator, ITRI Director

World Technology (WTEC) Division(Staff working on this study)

Geoffrey M. Holdridge, WTEC Division Director and Series EditorBobby A. Williams, Financial Officer

Roan E. Horning, Head of Information Technologies

Aminah Grefer, Global Support Inc., Europe Advance ContractorGerald Whitman, ENSTEC, Inc., Japan Advance Contractor

Hiroshi Morishita, WTEC Japan Representative

Copyright 2001 by Loyola College in Maryland except as elsewhere noted. This work relates to NSF CooperativeAgreement ENG-9707092. The U.S. government retains a nonexclusive and nontransferable license to exercise allexclusive rights provided by copyright. The ISBN number for this report is 1-883712-61-0. This report is distributed bythe National Technical Information Service (NTIS) of the U.S. Department of Commerce as NTIS PB2001-104339. Alist of available JTEC/WTEC reports and information on ordering them from NTIS is included on the inside back coverof this report.

i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Table of Contents ...............................................................................................................................................iList of Figures ..................................................................................................................................................ivList of Tables ...................................................................................................................................................vi

Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................................vii

1. IntroductionTimothy Gutowski

Background.........................................................................................................................................1Methodology.......................................................................................................................................2Manufacturing and the Environment ..................................................................................................4Systems View of Manufacturing ........................................................................................................6References...........................................................................................................................................7

2. Geographic TrendsCynthia F. Murphy

Summary.............................................................................................................................................9Introduction.........................................................................................................................................9Drivers and Motivation.....................................................................................................................10Observations .....................................................................................................................................14Summary Matrices............................................................................................................................19Conclusions.......................................................................................................................................21References.........................................................................................................................................22

3. Strategic VisionDavid T. Allen

Introduction.......................................................................................................................................23EBM Environmental Objectives .......................................................................................................23Drivers for EBM Environmental Objectives.....................................................................................24Metrics for Monitoring EBM Environmental Status and Progress ...................................................25Implementing EBM: Identifying Research Needs ............................................................................26Summary...........................................................................................................................................29Reference ..........................................................................................................................................29

4. Systems Level IssuesDeborah Thurston and Bert Bras

Summary...........................................................................................................................................31Introduction.......................................................................................................................................31The Complexity of Systems Issues ...................................................................................................33Current Systems Approaches............................................................................................................34Summary and Recommendations from Systems Viewpoint.............................................................39References.........................................................................................................................................41

5. Materials & ProductsTimothy Gutowski, Cynthia F. Murphy, Tom Piwonka, and John Sutherland

Metals and Metal Manufacturing (T. Piwonka)................................................................................43Polymers (T. Gutowski)....................................................................................................................53Environmental Issues of the Automotive Industry (J. Sutherland) ...................................................62Electronics (C.F. Murphy) ................................................................................................................79Energy (T. Piwonka).........................................................................................................................89

Table of Contentsii

6. Cross-Cutting Technologies and ApplicationsDiana Bauer and Paul Sheng

Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 101Communicating Requirements in the Supply Chain....................................................................... 101Data, Information, and Knowledge Management........................................................................... 103Alignment of Technology, Regulation, and Economic Drivers...................................................... 109Vision for the Future....................................................................................................................... 111References ...................................................................................................................................... 113

7. Research Structure to Develop EBM TechnologiesEgon Wolff

Summary ........................................................................................................................................ 115Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 115Policies ........................................................................................................................................... 116European Union and Japan Overview ............................................................................................ 119Observed Areas of EBM Research in Japan and the EU ................................................................ 120Findings .......................................................................................................................................... 120References ...................................................................................................................................... 121

APPENDICES

A. Biographies of Panel Members....................................................................................................... 123

B. Biographies of Other Team Members ............................................................................................ 128

C. Site Reports—Europe

DaimlerChrysler AG....................................................................................................................... 130Delft University of Technology (TU Delft).................................................................................... 133The European Commission Directorate for Science, Research and Development The

Environment Directorate-General ........................................................................................... 137EX-CELL-O GmbH ....................................................................................................................... 140Fraunhofer IGB (Institut Grenzflächen- und Bioverfahrenstechnik).............................................. 142Fraunhofer IPT (Institut Produktionstechnologie).......................................................................... 144Fraunhofer IZM (Institut Zuverlassigkeit und Mikrointegration)................................................... 146Hoogovens Steel ............................................................................................................................. 148Institute for Communication and Analysis of Science and Technology (ICAST).......................... 150IVF– Institutet för Verkstadsteknisk Forskning ............................................................................. 151MIREC B.V. ................................................................................................................................... 155Siemens AG.................................................................................................................................... 159Technical University of Berlin ....................................................................................................... 163Technical University of Denmark .................................................................................................. 165University of Stuttgart .................................................................................................................... 167University of Technology–Aachen................................................................................................. 169AB Volvo........................................................................................................................................ 171

D. Site Reports—Japan

Fuji Xerox (Ebina plant)................................................................................................................. 174Hitachi Production Engineering Research Laboratory (PERL)...................................................... 177Horiba, Ltd. .................................................................................................................................... 180Kubota Corporation ........................................................................................................................ 182Mechanical Engineering Laboratory (MEL) .................................................................................. 184Nagoya University.......................................................................................................................... 190National Institute for Resources and Environment (NIRE) ............................................................ 192NEC Corporation............................................................................................................................ 194

Table of Contents iii

Nippon Steel Corporation (NSC)....................................................................................................197New Earth Conference and Exhibition, Osaka, Japan ....................................................................199National Institute of Materials and Chemical Research (NIMC)....................................................200National Research Institute for Metals (NRIM)..............................................................................201Polyvinyl Chloride Industrial Association ......................................................................................203Sony Corporation............................................................................................................................205Toyo Seikan Kaisha (Saitama Plant) ..............................................................................................207Toyota Motor Corporation..............................................................................................................210University of Tokyo........................................................................................................................213Institute of Industrial Science .........................................................................................................215

E. Site Reports—United States

Applied Materials ...........................................................................................................................218Caterpillar Inc. Remanufacturing Facilities ....................................................................................221Casting Emission Reduction Program (CERP)...............................................................................224Chaparral Steel/Texas Industries ....................................................................................................225DaimlerChrysler Corp.....................................................................................................................227DRI/HBI Use in the EAF – An Idea Whose Time Has Come? ......................................................229DuPont Experimental Station .........................................................................................................231E.I. DuPont de Nemours .................................................................................................................233E.I. du Pont de Nemours.................................................................................................................236Federal-Mogul Corp. ......................................................................................................................237Ford Motor Company .....................................................................................................................239General Motors Corp. .....................................................................................................................242Interface Americas, Inc...................................................................................................................245IBM.................................................................................................................................................247Johnson Controls Inc. .....................................................................................................................248MBA Polymers, Inc. .......................................................................................................................250Micro Metallics Corp. (Noranda Inc.) ...........................................................................................253National Center for Manufacturing Sciences..................................................................................254

F. Glossary ..........................................................................................................................................255

iv

LIST OF FIGURES

1.1 TRI releases for 1998 from the EPA by category .................................................................................... 41.2 Major waste types by weight in the United States ................................................................................... 51.3 Total energy-related carbon emissions for selected manufacturing industries, 1994............................... 51.4 A closed systems view of manufacturing showing all of the major activities and reuse and

recycle paths......................................................................................................................................... 6

2.1 The U.S. has almost three times as much area as the EU and nearly 30 times the area of Japan.In addition, the U.S. government must represent the needs and desires of 50 states, the EUsubstantially fewer (with 15 member states), and Japan has a single central government ................. 11

2.2 The U.S. has significantly more ethnic diversity than either the EU or Japan, where ethnicgroups are defined as people of European, African, Asian, or other heritage .................................... 11

2.3 Japan has an extremely high population density, especially if adjusted for inhabitable area................. 132.4 When normalized (per capita for municipal and dollar for industrial), the U.S. is still the world’s

biggest producer of solid waste, with Japan producing nearly the same amount of industrialwaste; data are for 1990...................................................................................................................... 15

2.5 In the EU, the ratio of revenue from environmental taxes, compared to revenue from other taxesand social contributions, steadily increased, 1980-96 ........................................................................ 17

2.6 Most of the environmental taxes, and most of the increase in taxes, in the EU are from energytaxes, including transport fuels, which make up more than three-quarters of energy taxes ............... 18

2.7 1997 revenue from environmental taxes in EU member states, as a percentage of total revenueand social contributions...................................................................................................................... 18

3.1 Motorola has developed the above matrix to map EBM environmental objectives against drivers....... 243.2 Relative energy use, material use, waste generation, and water use are shown for the

manufacturing phase of the computer workstation life cycle ............................................................. 27

4.1 Environmental and organizational scales of environmental impact reduction approaches.................... 33

5.1 Schematic of injection molding ............................................................................................................. 565.2 Product life cycle ................................................................................................................................... 635.3 Material composition of a generic mid-size U.S. automobile ................................................................ 645.4 Solid waste for three life-cycle stages for a generic mid-size U.S. automobile ..................................... 675.5 Sources of manufacturing waste for a generic U.S. vehicle...................................................................685.6 Tier I and Tier II EPA air quality standards........................................................................................... 725.7 Fuel economy estimates for various vehicle configurations .................................................................. 745.8 Individual integrated circuits are fabricated on silicon wafers, singulated, packaged and

assembled onto printed wiring boards ................................................................................................ 815.9 PWBs are typically constructed with epoxy-glass and copper; connectivity between layers is

most commonly provided by plated through holes (PTHs)................................................................ 815.10 Microvia technologies typically use less water and produce less waste than conventional plated-

through-holes...................................................................................................................................... 825.11 In the U.S., the number of PCs shipped in 1992 was 11.5 million. In 2005, the number is

projected to be 55.8 million................................................................................................................ 855.12 The average lifetime of a PC in 1992 was 4.5 years. By 2005, the average age is projected to be

two years ............................................................................................................................................ 855.13 The number of PCs that became obsolete in 1997 was 17.5 million. By 2007, the number is

projected to reach 61.3 million........................................................................................................... 85

List of Figures v

6.1 Material and information flow in the supply chain ..............................................................................1026.2 Supply chain decision-makers and their motivating factors.................................................................1036.3 Organizational levels of aggregation for actuation and assessment of environmental activities..........1046.4 Hierarchical decision-making at Chaparral Steel .................................................................................1046.5 Design for environment in the CMP process........................................................................................1076.6 Technology, incentives, and cost drivers combine to strengthen environmental activities..................1096.7 Moving from compliance to continuous improvement ........................................................................1106.8 Cross-cutting drivers for PVC recycling ..............................................................................................1106.9 Expanding the region of internal costs through extended producer responsibility...............................1116.10 Cross-cutting drivers for vehicle recycling—DaimlerChrysler............................................................1126.11 Important long, medium, and short range activities .............................................................................112

7.1 (a) U.S. R&D spending; (b) Pacific Rim R&D spending relative to U.S.............................................1177.2 EU research funding.............................................................................................................................118

vi

LIST OF TABLES

ES.1 Government Activities—Relative Competitiveness ............................................................................... ixES.2 Industrial Activities—Relative Competitiveness .................................................................................... ixES.3 Research and Development Activities—Relative Competitiveness......................................................... x

1.1 Sites Visited: Japan.................................................................................................................................. 31.2 Sites Visited: Europe (Belgium, Denmark, Netherlands, Germany, Sweden, Switzerland) ................... 31.3 Sites Visited: U.S. .................................................................................................................................... 3

2.1 Imports and Exports between Regions as a Share of GDP .................................................................... 122.2 Population and Unemployment (late 1990s).......................................................................................... 132.3 Examples of EU Environmental Taxes .................................................................................................. 172.4 Government Activities ........................................................................................................................... 202.5 Industrial Activities................................................................................................................................ 202.6 Research and Development Activities ................................................................................................... 202.7 Educational Activities............................................................................................................................ 213.1 Issues and Drivers for EBM................................................................................................................... 253.2 List of EBM Metrics Recommended by Electronics OEMs and Suppliers ........................................... 253.3 USCAR Websites................................................................................................................................... 28

4.1 Motivating Factors for EBM.................................................................................................................. 324.2 Modeling and Information Needs .......................................................................................................... 40

5.1 Some Potential Environmental Problems with Polymers....................................................................... 545.2 End-of-Life Options and Issues ............................................................................................................. 585.3 Amount of Various Material Types Used in an Automobile and their Usage as a Percent of the

Total U.S. Consumption..................................................................................................................... 655.4 California Low Emission Vehicle Classifications.................................................................................. 72

6.1 Levels of Supply Chain Management Requirements Focusing on Components and Processes .......... 1066.2 Typical Environmental Needs of Customers ....................................................................................... 1066.3 Metric Types........................................................................................................................................ 1086.4 Observed Environmental Priorities and Corresponding Metrics.......................................................... 1096.5 Key Tasks By Organization For Cross Cutting Activities ................................................................... 114

7.1 Levels of Comparative Advantage....................................................................................................... 116

vii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Timothy Gutowski

INTRODUCTION 1

Is “environmentally benign manufacturing” an oxymoron? Or is it possible to align business needs withenvironmental needs? This is the central issue addressed in this report. What follows is a summarydiscussion, which outlines the current state of environmentally benign manufacturing (EBM). These findingsare based upon the observations of a panel of U.S. experts during visits to Japan, Europe and the UnitedStates, as well as the panelists’ substantial expertise in the various areas of this broad and challenging field.Because of the breadth of this topic, panelists focused their attention on two key areas: processing andproducts. In processing, the focus was on metals and polymers, since by far the vast majority of products aremade from these materials. Among products, the focus was on automobiles and electronics, two productswith significant environmental activity. Details of the panel’s 52 site visits can be found in the appendices ofthis report. This summary has five remaining sections: The Problem, Major Findings, U.S. Competitiveness,Barriers to Progress, and the Technology Summaries for Metals, Polymers, Automobiles, and Electronics.

THE PROBLEM

The area of environmentally benign manufacturing addresses the central long-term dilemma formanufacturing: how to achieve economic growth while protecting the environment. The conflict isfundamental, rooted in part in the materials conversion process, which takes from the earth and gives to thecustomer, the stockholder, and to those who make a living or derive support from this enterprise, and in partin consumerism, which focuses on current needs often with disregard for the future. The resolution of thisconflict is a serious issue for society to address, for in the near future it will threaten our well-being. Thequestion then for environmentally conscious manufacturers is how to incorporate both economy andenvironment into their business plans.

Once a firm is motivated to address environmental issues, what then are the right things to do? The answersare not simple. There are many aspects to this problem, including: toxic materials, waste and wastewater,emissions and greenhouse gases, energy usage, and material and product recycling. Furthermore, at the rootof all environmental issues are people—people with different values, goals and needs, and people fromdifferent generations. The development of an environmental strategy needs to address all of these issues andtranslate this understanding into an effective program of action.

The panelists’ work, then, was to sort out these complex and intertwined issues, and to organize them in away that is both understandable and inclusive. Often, the issues went far afield from the original engineeringfocus of the panelists. But the overwhelming importance of these broad issues requires that they be includedhere to accurately represent the nature of our findings.

1 The views expressed in this summary are the consensus views of the entire panel. References can be found in theoriginal chapters from which this summary is derived.

Timothy Gutowskiviii

MAJOR FINDINGS

1. Motivation at the corporate level: The panel saw a clear trend towards the “internalization” ofenvironmental concerns by manufacturing companies, particularly large international companies. For avariety of reasons, large companies like Sony, Toyota, Hitachi, Volvo, DaimlerChrysler, IBM, Motorola,Ford, DuPont and others profess to behave in environmentally responsible ways and provide reports anddata from self-audits to demonstrate this commitment. The motivations for this behavior are many,including cost reduction, risk mitigation, market advantage, regulatory flexibility, and corporate image.At the core though, the panel was convinced that many companies really do understand the problem: anylong term sustainable business policy must address the relationship to the environment.

2. Strategies at the national level: The development of a strategy is a critical part of EBM. In general,companies develop strategies that are compatible with their national strategies, while multinationalcompanies need to respond to the strategies of many countries. The strategies of the EU, Japan and theUnited States are strongly influenced by their national concerns and societal structures. In capsule form,the main issues are as follows:

− In Japan: (1) a focus on the conservation of resources including reductions in energy, materials,solid wastes, and greenhouse gases; (2) an alignment of internal resources by public education,environmental leadership, consensus building, and tools development including LCA (Life CycleAssessment), DFE (Design for the Environment), and ISO 14000 certification; and (3) a systematicimplementation of EBM as a competitive strategy.

− In Europe: (1) a concern for solid wastes and toxic materials; (2) a product take-back focus; (3) asystems orientation built upon interdisciplinary agenda setting and tools development; and (4) astrong political basis for environmental concerns.

− In the United States: (1) a regulatory focus on pollution by medium; (2) a materials, process,technology, and cost orientation; (3) a reliance on free enterprise to solve system level problems;and (4) a tendency toward adversarial positions which are solved by litigation.

3. Systems-level problem solving: To be successful, progress in EBM requires integration of technology,economic motivation, regulatory actions and business practices. Examples abound of missedopportunities when any element is missing. Fundamental to this systems approach is dialog andcooperation between stakeholders. In the most effective firms a clear strategy is developed and woveninto business practices. The setting of targets and constancy of mission are essential to this process. Byfar the most highly coordinated efforts seen by the panelists were in Japan. For example, Toyota views“lean manufacturing” and “green manufacturing” as essentially the same thing.

4. Analytic tools for addressing products: The emphasis in Europe and Japan is shifting to theenvironmental consequences of products in all of their stages of life. Along with this shift, there is aclear need for analytic tools to assist in the assessment of life cycle consequences of actions and policiesand to guide design decisions for new products and processes. The Japanese have a national program todevelop LCA, and are integrating these tools into engineering design practice. The Europeans have largecoordinated projects within industries and run by academics to develop LCA tools, and they are ahead ineducating university students to develop these tools.

5. Technology highlights: While the panel saw no “silver bullet” technologies to solve environmentalproblems, technology clearly plays a central role. The main feature required is that the technology mustwork in an integrated systems approach to the problem. Some technology highlights include: a completesystem for recycling PVC from construction materials in Japan; a strong emphasis on technologydevelopment and transfer in Japan and Europe; the use of plastics as reducing agents in steel making inJapan and Germany; a steel can production facility in Japan that increases recyclability, reduces wastesand reduces costs; and car doors reinforced with natural fibers in Germany. Four technology areas aretreated in more detail at the end of this summary.

Executive Summary ix

U.S. COMPETITIVENESS

Based upon observations from the site visits as well as the experience of the panelists, the three regionsvisited are ranked in three areas: (1) governmental activities; (2) industrial activities; and (3) research anddevelopment. These are shown in Tables ES.1, ES.2, and ES.3. Overall, Europe leads in most governmentalactivities, Japan in industrial activities, and the results for research and development are mixed. The UnitedStates leads in financial and legal liability concerns, water conservation, decreased industrial releases to airand water, and research in polymers and long term electronics R&D, but follows in all other areas. In thearea of university educational activities, and both industry and government sponsorship of these, it is clearthat Europe leads, followed by the United States and then Japan. Overall, across all these areas, the UnitedStates ranks third behind Europe and Japan.

Table ES.1Government Activities—Relative Competitiveness*

Activity Japan U.S. Europe

Take-back legislation ** * ****

Landfill bans ** * ***

Material bans * * **

LCA tool and database development *** ** ****

Recycling infrastructure ** * ***

Economic incentives ** * ***

Regulate by medium * ** *

Cooperative/joint efforts with industry ** * ****

Financial and legal liability * **** **Number of asterisks indicate comparative strength, and are intended to be indicative of level ofeffort and emphasis as much as actual level of success.

Table ES.2Industrial Activities—Relative Competitiveness


ISO 14000 certification **** * ***

Water conservation ** *** *

Energy conservation/CO2 emissions **** ** **

Decreased releases to air and water * *** **

Post Industrial solid waste reduction/recycling **** ** ***

Post-consumer recycling ** * ****

Material and energy inventories *** * **

Alternative material development ** * ***

Supply chain involvement ** * **

EBM as a business strategy **** ** ***

Life-cycle activities ** ** **

Timothy Gutowskix

Table ES.3Research and Development Activities—Relative Competitiveness


Relevant Basic Research (> 5 years out)

Polymers ** *** **

Electronics ** *** *

Metals *** * **

Automotive/Transportation ** * ***

Systems ** * ***

Applied R&D (< 5 years out)

Polymers * *** **

Electronics *** ** **

Metals *** * **

Automotive/Transportation *** * ***

Systems ** * ***

BARRIERS TO PROGRESS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR RESEARCH

1. Motivation, policy and education: It was the panelists’ impression that many people in manufacturingare not yet aware of the potential magnitude of the effect that the environment will have on theirbusiness. In fact, the U.S. public as a whole is somewhat behind in awareness of environmental issues.It can be argued that this is due to different conditions in the United States, namely more room and lowerpopulation densities. But population densities on our East Coast are generally quite similar to those inEurope, and our rates of waste production and energy usage are beyond those of all other countries bothin absolute terms and on a per capita basis. Environmental education in the U.S. is now largely confinedto the early years of education. Much needs to be done to inform manufacturers and the public, and toeducate university students. Future engineers need both more depth and more breadth. This can onlyhappen with the generation of new knowledge that can symbolically represent the complex issues ofEBM.

On the policy level, a clear trend seen by the panelists was the move away from “command and control”policies toward more cooperative goal setting. Early results indicate clear advantages, both in terms ofeconomic outcomes as well as environmental consequences, when companies are given more flexibilityin their modes of response to environmental concerns.

2. Strategic planning: EBM presents a bewildering array of issues and opportunities to the manufacturer.In order to align business and environmental issues it is important for a company to develop a strategicplan. A first step in doing this is to identify objectives along with stakeholder needs and economicincentives. Although objectives will vary by region and firm, the panel found five commonenvironmental themes emerging: (1) reducing energy and material consumption; (2) waste reduction andreduced use of materials of concern (i.e., potentially harmful); (3) reducing the magnitude and impacts ofproduct packaging; (4) managing products that are returned to manufacturers at the end of their designeduse; and (5) customer demands for documented environmental management systems (EMS).

Strategic planning requires that conflicts among objectives be resolved, priorities set, and theenvironmental goals be integrated into the management system and technology development plan. It isthe panel’s observation that firms who do this see the benefits of EBM, while those who do not do thissee only the costs. This process can be greatly aided by technology roadmaps such as those developedunder the DOE’s program for “Industries of the Future.” More interdisciplinary planning, as well asworking with trade and industrial groups, is needed, however, in particular to help small and mediumsized businesses.

3. EBM implementation: EBM is a system of goals, metrics, technologies, and business practices. Insome ways its implementation is similar to the implementation of any effective business system. The

Executive Summary xi

WTEC panel’s impression is that companies that already have effective business practices can readilyincorporate EBM into their system. For others, EBM implementation is a learning process that could paydividends by enhancing business practices for other objectives as well as the environment. Many firmshave been helped in their strategy implementation by the ISO 14000 certification process. For those whoparticipated in the ISO 9000 process and the quality movement, they will see that much previouslearning will apply to EBM implementation. The critical areas for attention are: (1) the development ofhigh performance business practices that will enhance EBM; (2) the application of these practices withparticular reference to small and medium businesses; and (3) the development of tools and technologiesthat will enable effective EBM.

4. System-level tools and data: Analytical tools along with supporting data and metrics are essential toeffective planning and implementation of EBM. The primary needs are tools that assess environmentalimpact and identify areas for improvement. Specific issues are: (a) LCA, (b) data, (c) metrics, and (d)DFE.

(a) A complete picture or assessment of the environmental consequences of an action requires bothtemporal and spatial tracking of multiple impacts. However, over ambitious pursuit of these goalscould render the tools to do this too complex and useless. This is the current dilemma of life cycleassessment, or LCA. Much work in this area needs to be done. Particular needs are consistency,transparency, and integration with other engineering tools.

(b) Good data are urgently needed for LCA and all other EBM tools. Data are necessary to set theagenda, identify priorities, calculate metrics, and for use in models. The issues are the ease ofacquisition, and proprietary and liability concerns.

(c) Metrics can be enormously helpful in communicating and aligning goals; however, they are valueladen and potentially contentious. Work needs to be done in developing scientific underpinnings ofa number of existing and proposed measures.

(d) “Design for the environment,” or DFE, is a broad category of tools that could include avoidance ofbanned materials, design for reuse, design for disassembly, design for recycling, etc. These toolsare clearly tied to regulations, business practices, and end-of-life technologies. Hence there is aneed to keep these tools current, and to integrate them into the design process. Together theyrepresent enormous leverage for EBM at the product development stage.

5. Technology development: Technology remains a strong suit for the United States, and EBM representsa vast array of technology opportunities. Of particular importance are technology solutions that integratewell into a complete systems concept. Key areas for attention are: (a) new processing technology; (b)new materials; (c) new energy and propulsion systems; and (d) technologies that address the manyaspects of the end-of-life treatment, including: identification, sorting, cleaning, separating, neutralizingcontaminants, shredding, reprocessing and recycling. At the same time the panel did see someshortcomings to the U.S. approach to technology. The United States appears to be under-funded in thearea of technology transfer when compared to Japan and Europe. Because of an often narrow focus oninvention, the U.S. is in jeopardy of losing its competitive advantage at the development stage, and tosome extent squandering its efforts even at the invention stage. Technology development—and inparticular technology transfer—needs serious new attention in the United States. The four maintechnology focus areas of this report are treated in more detail in the remainder of this summary.

TECHNOLOGY SUMMARIES

Metals

Metals represent a recycling success story. Structural, precious, and base metals are all recycled at rates thatare near or above 50%. However, metal usage is slowly being eroded by competition from other materials,especially polymers. The challenge to metals is to compete with these alternative materials while maintainingand improving recyclability. Trends towards higher strength metals and alloys, used in thinner sections,while improving the competitiveness of metals, will make their recycling more difficult. To preserve andexpand the benefits of metals, new technologies will have to be developed along with new materials. Theseinclude new methods to identify and sort alloys, remove coatings, and to eliminate and neutralizecontaminants.

Timothy Gutowskixii

Metals processing remains a significant source of environmental problems. Many of these problems areassociated with waste materials and related emissions from the basic processes of refining, machining,forming, casting and forging. The wastes include contaminated cuttings and chips, waste coolants, lubricants,casting sands, parts washing fluids, etc. Because of the high disposal costs for each of these, manufacturersare self-motivated to reduce, reuse and eliminate, but they need new technologies from which to choose.Examples of needed EBM research include: dry machining, bioactivity monitoring and control of machiningcoolants, true net shape component forming methods, alternative methods to control friction in metalforming, new casting sand binders, etc.

In addition, the primary processing of metals remains a serious threat to the environment. New work toreduce energy requirements and related CO2 and greenhouse gas emissions is needed. Currently, both thesteel and aluminum industries have been designated as “industries of the future” by the U.S. Department ofEnergy, and as such have developed cooperative research programs to address these issues.

Polymers

Polymers compete against other materials by virtue of their light weight and low cost. This can make themdesirable, and in fact environmentally friendly, during the “use phase” of the product. For example, the use ofpolymers and composites in automobiles has helped to lower weight and therefore lower fuel consumption.But these same attributes conspire to make recycling a difficult economic challenge. A lower materialdensity actually increases transportation costs per kg of material, and the low cost of virgin materials makesrecycling targets very difficult to meet. The primary problem is with the details of the reverse logistics stage,especially with streams that are extremely heterogeneous (mixed plastics) or dirty (contaminated with metaland paper). Major attention needs to be focused on the collection, transportation, cleaning and sorting of asufficiently pure waste stream to make plastics recycling economically viable. To accelerate recycling, newtechnologies can help. For example, small scale recycling technologies would lessen transportation andinfrastructure needs; new bulk-handling, cleaning and sorting techniques are also necessary.

Composites also pose a challenge. These materials can provide enormous benefits at the use phase, butequally enormous challenges at the end-of-life phase. One possible route to recyclable composites couldinvolve organic and/or biodegradable fibers. Other strategies could be based upon new materials withdesigned-in “disassembly” schemes. Polymers and polymer composites can also be used in various materialsexchanges and as fuels. For example, there are pilot programs in Japan and Germany to use polymers as areducing agent in steel making.

The processing challenges for polymers are in some ways quite similar to metals, in that many of the benefitsshould be self-motivating for the processors. However, there is a need for new technologies that concentrateon energy efficiency, and the reduction in volatile organics. These can include new efficient heating andcooling methods, new tooling, closed-loop control, and new materials and additives to reduce solvents,residual organics and other materials of concern.

One particularly interesting area is that of bio-polymers and bio-materials. There is significant activityworldwide in such areas as biodegradable polymers synthesized from petroleum, organic fibers and fillers,and biodegradable polymers derived from various crops and biomass. While this work looks very interesting,the overall effect of these materials on the environment is still not well known. For example, a recent analysishas shown that some new routes from crops to bio-polymers are actually more energy intensive than theconventional routes from petroleum. Much new work is needed to follow through the entire life cycle forthese materials.

Finally, the primary production of polymers from petroleum remains a serious challenge to the environment.These processes, contained in the petroleum and chemical industries, are subject to several initiatives tomove from end-of-pipe treatments to proactive “clean technologies” approaches. Several studies sponsoredby the United States’ Environmental Protection Agency have shown the combined economic andenvironmental gains that can be obtained by these means.

Executive Summary xiii

Automobiles

In automobiles we see the plastic, glass, ceramic and metal parts coming together to make a product that hasbeen growing worldwide three times faster than the population, and in the United States six times faster thanthe population. This type of growth and the potential new growth, as the worldwide standard of livingincreases, not only threatens the environment, but can threaten the automobile itself. For if infrastructure androadway construction does not keep pace (and it cannot in the already high population density regions of theworld) then the automobile may ultimately fail as a viable form of transportation in these regions. It is thistype of scenario that has helped to focus the attention of some of the automobile companies on theirenvironmental impact.

Many of the major environmental impacts associated with automobiles actually come during the vehicle usephase. In fact, transportation in general constitutes about one-third of all the energy needs in the U.S.—and isgrowing. Furthermore, autos and light vehicles contribute significant amounts of air pollutants and smogproducing agents to the atmosphere. Legislation has helped to motivate vehicle improvements, but increasesin fuel consumption per car, cars owned, miles traveled and congestion have counteracting effects. For one tothree months each year many major U.S. cities still cannot meet minimum air quality standards. This is anarea that begs for leadership, public education, and policies that reflect the true cost of vehicle ownership.

New directives from Europe that simultaneously set serious new fuel economy goals (on the order of a 40%improvement in seven years) and strict product take-back requirements (95% recycle for model year 2015)should help by encouraging the development of new technologies and design strategies. Furthermore, Europeis providing a role model of environmentally responsible behavior for the rest of the world. Effects from theEuropean initiative have already diffused to other parts of the world, both in terms of national legislation aswell as international design strategies for firms that sell autos to Europe and elsewhere in the world.

Vehicle recycling already exists as a successful free enterprise activity in the U.S., but its performance andviability has been declining as the volume of metals used in automobiles declines. It is critically importantthat auto recycling be improved to reclaim automobile shredder residue (ASR), including various polymers,rubber and glass components. This will require coordinated and intentional design and materials selectiondecisions on the part of the automobile manufacturers. Technology needs include identification of bothmaterials and contaminants, sortation and reprocessing technologies, life cycle analysis tools, new materials,and coatings removal technologies.

During manufacturing, much of the waste and wastewater used over the lifetime of a car is produced,significant amounts of energy are consumed, and various emissions are released to the atmosphere. Perhapsleading the list of environmental focus areas for automobile manufacturing is vehicle painting. Varioustechnologies can be implemented to reduce the environmental load from painting, including wastewatercleaning and recycling, and emissions treatment. New paint technologies now also offer water-based paintsand powder sprays. In addition, new approaches are looking at prepainted steel sheets and molded-in class Afinishes for plastic parts. This work needs further support, plus a thorough systems-level assessment thatincludes the potential impacts of increased inventories and scrap rates due to off-color results.

Many other areas of automobile manufacturing also need attention; some of them have already beenmentioned in the sections on metal and plastics parts manufacturing. In addition, however, a few areas standout for further attention. These include technologies for parts washing and glass manufacturing, as well as theenvironmental effects of various manufacturing systems designs. During the visit to Toyota, panelists sawexamples of “lean” manufacturing, which by virtue of the emphasis on the reduction of waste were clearemulations of “green” manufacturing. For example, one Toyota assembly plant in Tsutsumi produced only18 kg of landfill waste per vehicle.

Finally, WTEC panelists are concerned that the divestiture of parts manufacturing plants by the big sixautomakers will have a deleterious effect on the environment unless there is significant support forenvironmental technology development aimed at second and third tier suppliers.

Timothy Gutowskixiv

Electronics

The growth of electronics in our society is an impressive story. On the one hand it has led to an enormousboost to the economies of many countries, providing convenience, entertainment, and ready access toinformation and services, but on the other hand many of the manufacturing processes to make electronicdevices are both seriously wasteful and use and emit toxic and dangerous materials. Furthermore, the dualtrends of growing consumption and decreasing product life spans present a serious end-of-life issue. Forexample, the trend for PCs is a projected six-fold increase in the obsolescence rate over a six year span toabout 65 million PCs/year in 2003. Furthermore, as the PC has evolved, there is a tendency toward materialcompositions that are less easy to recycle. Silicon chips are no longer gold-backed, the volume of preciousand base metals used on printed wiring boards (PWBs) has decreased, and the housings are more commonlymade of engineering thermoplastics than steel.

However, by and large, the metals in electronics products can still be recycled, while the chips, which areexpensive to produce, cannot be recycled or reused. A major problem in the recycling of electronics is thepresence of flame retardants in the plastics, required by U.S. fire-prevention regulations. In Japan andEurope, plastics are incinerated rather than recycled and the presence of brominated flame retardants (BFRs)raises the concern of dioxin formation during the burning process. Unfortunately, BFRs are very difficult todetect economically in a recycling process. Since most products sold in the United States contain thesesubstances, and plastics cannot effectively be sorted by whether or not they contain BFRs, it is assumed thatmost recycled plastic from electronic products, particularly ABS, contains flame retardants. Consequently,many OEMs are reluctant to include recycled plastics in new products that may be sold in Europe. Thisdilemma has inspired a variety of responses from industry ranging from skepticism concerning the particularBFRs and the mechanisms by which they could become harmful, to enthusiastically embracing this problemas a “green” marketing opportunity should a viable alternative be found. This particular issue clearlyillustrates the complexity of EBM for international markets.

In addition to the end-of-life issues surrounding electronics, there are significant environmental impactsassociated with electronics manufacturing, particularly from wafer fabrication processes. These processes,which are characterized by gaseous deposition, ultra-clean manufacturing environments, and in some caseslow yields, result in high amounts of waste and wastewater, high usage of energy, and the emission ofmaterials of concern including perfluoro compounds. Because of the importance of these issues they havereceived research support through a variety of programs sponsored by SEMATECH, NSF and the EPA.Strategies to address issues at the wafer fab level have been outlined in the SIA (Semiconductor IndustryAssociation) roadmap.

A separate set of environmental issues is also encountered at the PWB and board level assembly steps. Theseinclude laminate manufacture and processing, cleaning, plating, etching, and various through-hole-platingand interconnect technologies. However, a current major focus is on lead-free solders. Driven primarily, ifnot exclusively, by the European Union’s WEEE Directive, there has been a strong incentive for electroniccompanies worldwide to develop alternatives to tin-lead (Sn-Pb) solder.

There is, however, resistance to converting to Pb-free solders. One of the challenges with Pb-free solders isthe difficulty in achieving satisfactory reliability during the use phase. A second problem with Pb-freesolders is that they typically have higher melting temperatures and therefore require increased processtemperatures. Since this is one of the final processes seen by the PWB, all the materials and components onthe board must be able to withstand the increased thermal exposure. This means that alternative, andprobably more expensive, components and substrates will need to be used.

In addition, many of the Pb-free alternatives are difficult to control (leading to scrap), and difficult to rework(leading to additional scrap) or disassemble. Some contain elements that are incompatible with recyclingprocesses.

Finally, if a full life-cycle analysis is done it is unclear that Pb-free solders are actually more environmentallyfriendly. If material availability, impacts of extraction, increased processing difficulties, and end-of-lifeissues are accounted for, Sn-Pb solder may actually be a better choice. Ultimately the best solution may becompletely new attachment technologies that do not use solder, such as adhesive flip chip.

Executive Summary xv

CLOSING COMMENT

For many people, the concept of EBM presented here requires a change in basic thinking. EBM is muchmore than preventing pollution and waste. It is a business opportunity and a social responsibility that areintimately intertwined. As U.S. Senator Gaylord Nelson said on the first Earth Day, 1970, “The economy isa wholly owned subsidiary of the environment. All economic activity is dependent upon that environmentwith its underlying resource base. When the environment is finally forced to file under Chapter 11 because itsresource base has been polluted, dissipated and irretrievably compromised, then the economy goes downwith it.”

Timothy Gutowskixvi

1

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

Timothy Gutowski

BACKGROUND

Is “environmentally benign manufacturing” (EBM) an oxymoron? Some may think so. Others, particularlythose involved in manufacturing, may feel that many processes such as injection molding, thermoforming ofpolymers, and sheet metal forming are already quite environmentally benign. What does EBM mean andhow much attention should we pay to it? How do EBM practices differ in various regions of the world? Arethere things we should be doing in terms of future research to promote EBM in the United States?

The above questions are the topics of this report, which is the culmination of a year-long study sponsored bythe National Science Foundation, with additional support from the Department of Energy. The work wasconducted by an interdisciplinary panel of engineers and scientists, who are experts in various aspects ofEBM, the environment, and manufacturing. Short biographies for the panel members can be found inAppendix A. In addition, the panelists were assisted by representatives from the sponsoring agencies, inparticular Dr. Delcie Durham (NSF), who was personally responsible for the development of this panel, aswell as Dr. Fred Thompson (NSF) and Dr. K.P. Rajurkar (NSF), and Dr. Toni Marechaux (DOE). Thisproject was administered by WTEC at Loyola College, where Geoff Holdridge, Bob Williams andRoan Horning provided additional assistance.

For the purpose of this study the panel started with the idea that EBM enables economic progress whileminimizing pollution and waste and conserving resources. As the study progressed, however, it appearedthat the concept of EBM embodied much more. If one takes the long view of things, the problem is muchmore complex than just drawing a box around a manufacturing process and responding to what goes in andcomes out. Decisions in manufacturing, including design, can have profound implications throughout theentire product life cycle, from raw materials production, through the use phase of the product and into itsend-of-life treatment. Hence a major portion of the environmental impact of a manufactured product couldoccur hundreds, or even thousands, of miles from its original point of manufacture. Furthermore, theconsequences of these decisions could occur over a time span affecting generations. One simple way to statethis is to say that “environmentally benign manufacturing” does not compromise the environment, or theopportunities for development, for the next generation. In other words, it focuses on integratingmanufacturing into a sustainable society. Hence the panel’s view of the problem was in terms of a largesystem with interconnecting parts. While alternative definitions of this term are possible, the panel took theseconcepts as the guiding premise for this study.

This broad interpretation of environmentally benign manufacturing drew our attention to a wide range ofissues and actions, and challenged the panel to organize this subject in a meaningful way. Perhaps ofimmediate concern is how to explain the motivation of industry to participate in EBM. Many see EBM inconflict with the financial responsibilities companies have to their owners. Hence the panel became keenlyinterested in sources of motivation for the firm—both internal and external (including motivational

1. Introduction2

governmental policies)—to pursue an EBM approach. Then, once the firm is motivated, the next question is,“What is the right thing to do?” When viewed as a large system, environmental issues are complex. Duringthe course of the study the panel learned of several instances where well meaning firms apparently did thewrong thing. This was usually due to a lack of information or tools to help in the analysis of complex dataand interactions. In many cases people learn by doing, so it was of utmost importance that current practicesbe understood. Consequently, the interests of the panel moved from policy, to general motivation, to datagathering and tools, and to industrial practice. The components of the solutions focused attention on goalsetting, metrics, and assessments, and the basic components of infrastructure, technology and methodology.Throughout this entire project, the panel had an overarching interest in identifying potential research projectsthat might develop these various components.

As can be seen, the range of issues for EBM is quite large. In order to make the panel’s mission manageable,the inquiries needed to be focused. Early in the study, and with the guidance of the NSF, it was decided tofocus primarily on manufacturing processes (including design) with an emphasis on the processing of metalsand polymers. In terms of applications of these processes, two key areas, automotive and electronics, wereselected, in large part because of these industries’ publicly stated goals in the area of EBM.

METHODOLOGY

After an initial kickoff meeting on July 13, 1999, a U.S. industry review was held in Arlington, Virginia, onOct. 5, 1999. At that meeting the panel was presented with reviews and technology roadmaps for steel,aluminum, casting, electronics, automotive, polymers and composites. Representatives from industry(manufacturers, consultants, and trade associations) and from several U.S. governmental agencies, includingthe EPA, DOE, and NSF, participated in the proceedings and provided their perspectives.

One of the goals of the study was to benchmark global trends. In addition to the U.S., Japan and northernEurope were chosen as countries/areas to visit, and to include in the benchmarking process, in part becausethey both have high population densities and high per capita GDP (gross domestic product)—two criticalfactors that generally indicate both the potential for environmental problems and the resources to addressthem. And, both areas are known for their international leadership in environmental issues. A trip to Japanwas made during October 17-25, 1999 and a trip to Europe took place during April 1-9, 2000. A series ofvisits to U.S. firms were made between January and June of 2000.

In each country, the panel attempted to visit a mix of sites, including governmental agencies and laboratories,academic institutions and companies. In the United States visits focused exclusively on companies. Therewere several goals for all site visits. These were: (1) to advance the understanding of environmentally benignmanufacturing, (2) to establish a baseline and document best practices in environmentally benignmanufacturing, (3) to promote international cooperation, and (4) to identify research opportunities.

A total of 52 different locations were visited in Japan, Europe and the United States. In addition, severaltelephone conference calls were made. These visits and interviews were conducted by members of the paneland by accompanying representatives from NSF and WTEC. The sites visited in Japan, Europe and theUnited States are listed in Tables 1.1, 1.2 and 1.3. For each site a report was written to document what waslearned. These reports were then reviewed by the hosts and revised if necessary. The final versions arecontained in Appendices C, D, and E of this report. In most cases only a subset of the panelists were able togo to any one site. But afterwards, summary meetings were held to share information and observe trends.On July 13, 2000 a public workshop was held in Arlington, Virginia, to present the findings. The meetingwas well attended, and many useful comments and constructive criticisms were received.

Writing this report represents the last task for the panel. In the following chapters we present our findings.The report starts with a high level overview of the key differences that were found between Japan, Europeand the United States (Chapter 2). This is followed by a discussion of the strategic issues that face firms andthose who develop the area of EBM (Chapter 3). The fourth chapter discusses systems level issues. One ofour key findings is that the Japanese and Europeans both view EBM as a systems problem and have put inplace various aspects of systems solutions. There is no evidence that this problem was solvable by a “silverbullet” technology. This conclusion is not too different from what was found years ago when the Japanese

Timothy Gutowski 3

economy was surging based in part on their new production systems. When the outside world went toinvestigate the “Toyota Production System” it was found that their success was not based on technology perse but rather a systems based solution, which integrated technology. The next chapter, Chapter 5, is by farthe largest, focusing on materials (metals and polymers) and product applications (automotive andelectronics), and with a special section on energy. Chapter 6 discusses cross-cutting issues between firms,and the final chapter (Chapter 7) makes observations and recommendations for research (Chapter 6). Thisreport is intended to promote discussion among industry, government and academia, and to guide futureresearch activities in the United States.

Table 1.1Sites Visited: Japan

Fuji Xerox NIMC

Hitachi PERL Nippon Steel Corporation

Horiba, Ltd. NIRE

Institute of Industrial Science NRIM

Kubota Corporation Polyvinyl Chloride Industrial Association

Mechanical Engineering Lab., MITI Sony Corporation

Nagoya University Toyo Seikan Kaisha

NEC Corporation Toyota Motor Corporation

New Earth Conference & Exhibition University of Tokyo

Table 1.2Sites Visited: Europe

(Belgium, Denmark, Netherlands, Germany, Sweden, Switzerland)

DaimlerChrysler AG ICAST

Delft University of Technology IVF

EC Directorate for Science, R&D MIREC B.V.

EC Environment Directorate-General Siemens AG

EX-CELL-O GmbH Technical University of Berlin

Fraunhofer IGB (Stuttgart) Technical University of Denmark

Fraunhofer IPT (Aachen) University of Stuttgart (IKP)

Fraunhofer IZM (Berlin) University of Technology, Aachen

Hoogovens Steel Volvo

Table 1.3Sites Visited: U.S.

Applied Materials General Motors Corporation

Caterpillar Inc. IBM

CERP Interface Americas, Inc.

Chaparral Steel/Texas Industries Johnson Controls Inc.

DaimlerChrysler Corporation MBA Polymers, Inc.

DuPont Midrex Seminar

Federal-Mogul Corporation Micro Metallics Corporation

Ford Motor Company NCMS

1. Introduction4

MANUFACTURING AND THE ENVIRONMENT

Among industrial activities in the U.S., manufacturing’s impact on the environment is enormous.Manufacturing industries are dominant in their environmental impact in such areas as toxic chemicals, waste,energy, and carbon emissions. Manufacturing is also a heavy user of water, and there have been many casesof air, water and soil contamination which have led to such actions as Superfund cleanups, class actions suitsand a variety of other corporate liabilities.

Among the industries selected by the EPA for toxic materials monitoring, manufacturing releases are largerthan all other activities, with the one exception of metals mining, which is closely related to manufacturing.This is shown in Figure 1.1, which gives the 1998 EPA Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) results by industrialcategories (EPA 1998).

Fig. 1.1. TRI releases for 1998 by category (EPA 1998).

Figure 1.2 shows the major waste types by weight in the U.S. using data taken from the Office of TechnologyAssessment (Wernick 1996). These figures become even more significant when one realizes that the UnitedStates produces more waste than any other country in the world. This is true both on an absolute scale andper capita (Park and Labys 1998). Hence, U.S. manufacturing might be characterized as the most wastefulindustrial activity, in the most wasteful nation. Note also that a large portion of this waste is water waste.This too is extremely significant because water usage both in the United States and throughout the worldexceeds supply. That is, we and others are pumping ground water out faster than it can be replenished bynature (McNeil 2000). Globally there is an estimated 160 billion cubic meter overdraft of groundwater peryear (Brown, Runner and Halwell 2000).

Timothy Gutowski 5

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

ManufacturingMining

Oil and Gas

Agricultural

Hazardous

MSW

Coal Ash

Medical

Billion Metric Tons of Waste GeneratedSource: US Congress, OTA-BP-82

Note: A large fraction of the totalweight in the industrial categories iswater. Dry weight of industrial wastescan be as low as 10% of the total.

Fig. 1.2. Major waste types by weight in the United States (1985) (Wernick et al. 1996).

In terms of energy usage, manufacturing again dominates all other industrial activities, taking up 80% of thetotal. And, because most of our energy consumption in the U.S. is from carbon-based fuels—oil, natural gas,and coal—manufacturing’s contribution to carbon emissions is roughly the same, around 80%, againdominating all industrial activities (DOE/EIA 1998). Hence, when all of these factors are considered, we seethat manufacturing is perhaps the most significant industrial activity in terms of potential environmentalimpact.

The nature and extent of the environmental impact varies within the manufacturing sector. However, for theindustries, which we are most interested in for this report, metals and polymers (often categorized aschemicals), the environmental impacts are often quite large. For example, in terms of TRI totals, plastics,chemicals, primary metals and fabricated metals collectively account for 63% of all of the “manufacturing”releases (Figure 1.1). Similarly, chemicals and primary metals and “others,” which includes fabrication, playa primary role in carbon emissions and energy usage (Figure 1.3). Hence, it is fairly clear thatmanufacturing—and in particular metals processing and polymer processing—deserve our attention for theirpotential impacts on the environment.

Source: Energy Information Administration, 1994

0 10 20 4030 50 60 70 80 90

All others (69.5)

Stone, Clay, and Glass Products (21.6)

Food and Kindred Products (24.4)

Paper and Allied Products (31.6)

Primary Metal Industries (64.5)

Chemical and Allied Products (78.3)

Petroleum and Coal Products (81.9)

Million Metric Tons

Manufacturing accounts for about 80% ofall industrial energy consumption, and 80%of energy related carbon emissions

Fig. 1.3. Total energy-related carbon emissions for selected manufacturing industries, 1994(DOE/EIA 1999).

1. Introduction6

SYSTEMS VIEW OF MANUFACTURING

Up to this point, we have thought of manufacturing as a simple open system into which flows variousresources for conversion, and out of which flows products, wastes and pollution. However, one could take amuch more extensive view of this problem. If we take the systems view of manufacturing, and track theconsequences of manufacturing and design decisions throughout the entire product development cycle, thiswould take us through (1) raw materials production, (2) manufacturing, (3) the use phase, and finally to (4)the end-of-life phase. This is a far broader view of manufacturing than the one that simply looks at theconsumption, wastes and pollutants occurring at the factory. These two different views of manufacturing canbe seen in Figure 1.4. The overall view is of the “closed” systems view of manufacturing, showing all of themajor activities and the connecting paths for reuse and recycling. In the center of the figure one can see the“open” systems view of manufacturing, which features only the box labeled ”Mfg.,” along with two inputarrows representing design and raw materials, and two output arrows representing wastes and products. It hasbecome clear to us that integrating manufacturing into a sustainable society requires the broader systemsview.

Manufacturing and the Product Life Cycle

RawMat’l

Mfg. UsePhase

E.O.L.

WasteReuse

Recycle, postconsumer

Recycle

industrial

Design

Fig. 1.4. A closed systems view of manufacturing showing all of the major activities and reuse and recyclepaths.

How big is the systems problem? One way to illustrate the magnitude of the problem we are faced with is towrite out environmental impact in terms of population, per capita GDP and impact per unit of GDP. This isoften called the “master equation” in industrial ecology texts (Graedel 1995). To be concrete about this, onemight think of a unit of GDP as a manufactured product, such as a car. Then the impact due to a car wouldbe the sum total of all activities to make, use and dispose of the car. So here we are using the extendeddefinition of manufacturing to illustrate our point. The equation would be

unitGDP

Impact

person

GDPPopulationImpact ××=

(1)

Now we can speculate about how the first two terms of the equation will change over, say the next 50 years.Of course nobody knows for sure, but short of a truly cataclysmic event, we can estimate the range ofpossibilities for these terms. For example, the U.S. Census Bureau “Middle Series” population estimate for2050 is 402,420,000 (U.S. Census Bureau 2000). This constitutes an increase from today by a factor of 1.48.GDP estimates can be made from a variety of sources. For example the 1998 World Factbook (CIA 1998)gives the U.S. 1997 GDP growth rate as 3.8%. If we keep this up for 50 years, GDP will grow by a factor of6.45. Using these two estimates in Equation (1), one can show that to maintain our current level of

Timothy Gutowski 7

environmental impact we would need to reduce the impact per unit of GDP by a factor of 9.55, or about oneorder of magnitude. Obviously one can consider many alternative scenarios and then redo this calculation,but just about anyway you do it, the result is a significant factor. For example, when the calculation is doneusing worldwide estimates one gets a factor from 6 to 10 (Graedel 1998). In other words, the problem thatfaces us is large, but the stakes are equally large. In order to maintain our standard of living and enjoy ahealthy environment, significant changes in manufacturing are required. History shows that mankind is bothadaptable and inventive. We have faced other difficult challenges and succeeded. To be successful here wemust start now to channel our inventiveness to solve this problem.

REFERENCES

Bauer, D. and S. Siddhaye. 1999. “Environmentally Benign Manufacturing Technologies: Draft Summary of theRoadmaps for U.S. Industries,” Oct 11. International Technology Research Institute, Loyola College in Maryland.Available on the Web at www.itri.loyola.edu/ebm/usws/welcome.htm.

Brown, L.R., M. Renner and B. Halwell. 2000. Vital Signs. Worldwatch Institute, Norton, 2000

Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). 1998. The World Factbook, CIA. Available on the Web at www.cia.gov.

Department of Energy (DOE). 1998. Emissions of Greenhouse Gases in the United States, DOE/EIA.

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 1998. TRI Total Releases, EPA. Available on the Web at www.epa.gov/tri.

Graedel, T.E., and B.R. Allenby. 1995. Industrial Ecology. Prentice Hall.

Graedel, T.E., and B.R. Allenby. 1998. Industrial Ecology and the Automobile, Prentice Hall.

McNeill, J.R. 2000. Something New Under the Sun. Norton.

Park, S.H., and W.C. Labys. 1998. Industrial Development and Environmental Degradation: A Source Book on theOrigins of Global Pollution. Edward Elgar Pub. Ltd.

Wernick, I.K., R. Herman, S. Govind, and J.H. Ausubel. 1996. “Materialization and dematerialization: Measures andtrends,” Daedalus 125(3): 171-198 (Summer).

U.S. Census Bureau. 2000. Jan. 13. See www.census.gov.population – projections – nation-summary-up-t2pdf.

1. Introduction8

9

CHAPTER 2

GEOGRAPHIC TRENDS

Cynthia F. Murphy

SUMMARY

Cultural, geographic, and business needs strongly influence environmentally benign manufacturing in thethree regions that this panel studied, making direct comparisons somewhat challenging. In order tosummarize the trends in each geographic area, four categories were considered: government, industry,research and development, and education. Government in both Japan and Europe appears (at leastoutwardly) to operate at a greater level of interaction and cooperation with the private sector than doesgovernment in the United States. As a result, both of these regions tend to have a more proactive approach toproblem solving. The U.S., largely in response to financial and legal liabilities associated with a significantamount of regulatory action, tends to solve problems in a more reactive manner. Based on the panel’sobservations, U.S. industry is focused on the reduction of liability, decreased resource consumption(especially water), and pollution prevention. Corporations in Japan are concerned with energy conservation(reduced CO2 emissions), decreased solid waste, and incorporation of environmental issues into businessstrategies. EU industries are very involved in end-of-life issues. Research in the U.S. is heavily focused onmaterials and process technologies. Japan’s efforts are more closely aligned with applications andmanufacturing systems. European research is heavily weighted in the area of systems engineering,particularly in the areas of design for the environment (DFE) and life-cycle assessment (LCA). Highereducation has begun to address EBM to a much greater degree in the European countries than in either theU.S. or Japan.

INTRODUCTION

One of the goals of this study was to benchmark and compare trends in Japan, northern Europe and the U.S.The motivation for doing this was to understand how well the U.S. is performing in the area ofenvironmentally benign manufacturing relative to the EU and Japan in the areas of research anddevelopment, industrial strategies and priorities, governmental policies and regulations, and educationalactivities. A key finding is that cultural, geographic, and business needs strongly influence the focus areas ineach of these regions, making direct comparisons rather challenging. At a technical level, the tendency notedfor each of the regions is as follows. The U.S. appears to be most heavily involved in materials andprocesses and in avoiding litigation. Japan is focused on applications that incorporate EBM into businessstrategies, introduction of new products (primarily to gain market share), and resource conservation. The EUis concerned primarily with product end-of-life, infrastructure (supply chain and reverse logistics),elimination of materials of concern, and systems level modeling.

2. Geographic Trends10

DRIVERS AND MOTIVATION

United States

The United States has a significant history in the area of environmental protection. Conservationists andactivists such as John Muir (the Sierra Club), Theodore Roosevelt (national monuments/parks), RachaelCarson (Silent Spring), Pete Seeger (Hudson River Sloop), and the Environmental Defense (Fund) (ED(F))foundation (banning of DDT through legislation) have reached the population through a variety of media. Inmost cases, these activities were in response to acute and highly visible problems. These efforts led to theformal recognition of environmentalism through the passage of the National Environmental Policy Act of1969 (NEPA), Earth Day at the request of U.S. Senator Gaylord Nelson of Wisconsin on April 22, 1970, andthe subsequent formation of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) a few months later by executiveorder under President Nixon. This was followed by the Clean Air Act (CAA) in 1970, the ResourceConservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) and the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) in 1976, and theComprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA or Superfund) in1980, and many more. (Interested readers are referred to the EPA web site at http://www.epa.gov/epahome.)

The result of this “emergency” response approach was the formation of “go-no-go” type legislation thatassumed that big business would not voluntarily act in an environmentally responsible way. The thresholdtype of regulations that resulted are largely focused on protection of specific media (air, land, and water)from toxic substances rather than resource conservation (despite some of the names) or tackling of systemicproblems, such as CO2 emissions. In addition, the litigious culture of the U.S. encourages risk managementand minimization. This tends to produce a defensive posture within industry and encourages an emphasis onaccountability (focus on things that might or do go wrong), rather than fostering a proactive culture betweenindustry and government that focuses on improvements and system level solutions. It also reflects a generaldistrust of government, as pointedly illustrated by Ronald Reagan’s winning a presidential election byarguing that government in and of itself was bad—“Get the government off the backs of the people and outof the economy” (Thurow 1985). Lastly, the U.S. has always had a representative government where thegovernment is held accountable to the people, making the populace resistant to situations where the reverseappears to be true.

Business management techniques that are common in the U.S. may also make it difficult to implement EBM.Large companies are often divided into small business units (SBUs) that may be encouraged to compete withone another. This can act to discourage cooperation across SBUs, which is critical to effectiveimplementation of design-for-environment practices. Strong economic drivers (including the stock market)require companies to immediately correlate cost-savings with environmental benefit. This may not be aneasy task, especially with short-term accountability fostered by quarterly accounting and reporting practices.Most of the companies that have notable EBM programs either have a strong, motivated individual acting asa champion, such as with Interface, or they are large, international corporations, such as Ford or IBM, thatcan more readily justify a corporate EBM program (see Appendix E).

Large geographic areas and many individual state and municipal governments make infrastructure achallenge in the U.S. The United States covers a total of 9.6 million square kilometers, while the 15 EUcountries cover only 3.2 million km2, and Japan has a very small area with only 378 thousand km2

(Figure 2.1).

Cynthia F. Murphy 11

United States

European Union

Japan

Area (thousand-km2)

United States

European Union

Japan

Number of governments

0 2,500 5,000 7,500 10,000 0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Fig. 2.1. The U.S. has almost three times as much area as the EU and nearly 30 times the area of Japan. Inaddition, the U.S. government must represent the needs and desires of 50 states, the EU substantially

fewer (with 15 member states), and Japan has a single central government.

In addition, a diverse ethnic and socio-economic character (Figure 2.2) and the need for companies to appealto many different stakeholders challenge consensus building in the U.S.

Other

Asian

African

European

US EU Japan

Fig. 2.2. The U.S. has significantly more ethnic diversity than either the EU or Japan, where ethnic groupsare defined as people of European, African, Asian, or other heritage. Data from the U.S. Central

Intelligence Agency’s The World Factbook (2000) (see www.cia.gov).

European Union

The European Union (EU) currently consists of 15 member states, but this number is expected to grow. Themembers as of this report writing are Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece,Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, The Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, and The United Kingdom. Since thepurpose of this study was to benchmark best practices, the panel made site visits in countries that haveespecially notable activities in the area of EBM. However, given the time constraints of the trip, we wereunable to cover all of the leading nations. The observations made in this report are therefore based largely onactivities in Belgium, Germany, The Netherlands, and Sweden. However, Denmark, The United Kingdom,and Finland are also leaders in this area, and there is significant literature from these nations the findings ofwhich (to the extent possible) are incorporated into the following evaluations.

The EU enjoys a rather unique position in that the relatively new cooperative efforts associated with itsformation facilitate adoption of established “best practices” from its member nations. The EuropeanEnvironment Agency (EEA) has been functional for only a little more than five years. The decision to formthe EEA was made in 1990 and the decision to locate it in the Danish capital of Copenhagen was made inOctober 1993. In 1999, the agency had a staff of 70 and a budget of 18.1 million EUR. The EEA coversthree main areas: networking, monitoring and reporting, and acting as a reference center. More can be foundat its Web site (http://org.eea.eu.int/documents).


The European Union has a relatively low amount of imports and exports (Table 2.1). Only 8% of the totalGDP is exported to the U.S. and Japan, and imports are equal to only slightly more than that. In contrast,imports into Japan from the U.S. and the EU are equivalent to 38% of its GDP and exports to the sameregions are equal to 48%. Since the movement of products in and out of its sphere of influence is lowrelative to the other two regions, it is suggested that this would allow the EU to more efficiently focus onsupply stream and end-of-life product management than the U.S. and Japan.

Table 2.1Imports and Exports between Regions as a Share of GDP

% GDP Exported % GDP Imported

From the U.S. to Into the U.S. from

Japan 10.0% Japan 14.0%

EU 21.0% EU 18.0%

Japan plus EU 31.0% Japan plus EU 32.0%

From Japan to Into Japan from

U.S. 30.0% U.S. 24.0%

EU 18.0% EU 14.0%

U.S. plus EU 48.0% U.S. plus EU 38.0%

From the EU to Into the EU from

U.S. 7.3% U.S. 7.4%

Japan 0.9% Japan 1.8%

U.S. plus Japan 8.2% U.S. plus Japan 9.2%

Data from U.S. CIA, The World Factbook (2000).

Europe has a relatively high population density and most of the EU nations have well-establishedtransportation systems that are critical in the development of take-back infrastructure. This has maderecycling more logistically and economically viable. In addition, there is minimal space for landfill andresistance to incineration for plastics disposal. A relatively high unemployment rate (Table 2.2) and workers’rights have led to more acceptance of manual disassembly. All of these factors are critical to thedevelopment of well-defined end-of-life policies, especially for electronics and vehicles.

Japan

Formal governmental control over environmental issues is relatively new in Japan (as compared to the UnitedStates). In 1989, the Japanese government established the Council of Ministers for Global EnvironmentConservation to work on global environmental issues, and in November 1993, the "Basic Environment Law"was enacted. The focus was almost exclusively on reduction of greenhouse gases (carbon dioxide emissions)through energy-saving technologies within the industry sector. The government has assisted in this effortthrough special taxation measures and low-interest financing for energy-saving capital equipment. The Website for the Environment Agency, Government of Japan (http://www.eic.or.jp/eanet/en/index.html)concentrates on information related to energy conservation and CO2 emissions. Japan must importsignificant amounts of natural resources including fossil fuels for energy production. Japan also has thehighest cost of energy in ODEC. So while there is a significant emphasis on CO2 emissions (since this isseen as a direct function of energy consumption and the typical metric) there are clear economic as well asenvironmental incentives to conserve energy.

In addition to energy, the overall limited natural resources throughout this island nation’s history has resultedin a cultural aversion to wastefulness. Japan’s economy is a value-added one: natural resources are importedand products are exported. Almost half of Japan’s GDP is exported to the U.S. and the EU (Table 2.1).Consequently, corporations must be very product oriented and must be responsive to both market activitiesand policies in Europe and the U.S. For this reason, ISO 14000 is viewed as a critical competitive issue.


Table 2.2Population and Unemployment (late 1990s)

Country Population Unemployment

Austria 8,139,299 7%

Belgium 10,182,034 12%

Denmark 5,356,845 6.5%

Finland 5,158,372 12%

France 58,978,172 11.5%

Germany 82,087,361 10.6%

Greece 10,707,135 10%

Ireland 3,632,944 7.7%

Italy 56,735,130 12.5%

Luxembourg 429,080 3%

Netherlands 15,807,641 4.1%

Portugal 9,918,040 5%

Spain 39,167,744 20%

Sweden 8,911,296 6.3%

U.K. 59,113,439 7.5%

Total EU (mean) 374,324,532 10.9%

U.S. 272,639,608 4.5%

Japan 126,182,077 4.4%

Data from U.S. CIA, The World Factbook (2000).

One of the strongest drivers in Japan is the high population density. The overall population density of Japan(333 people per km2) is about twice that of the EU (117 people per km2), but 85% of the land in Japan isuninhabitable, primarily due to steep-sided mountains. Consequently, the effective population density inJapan is nearly four times that of the Netherlands and twenty-six times that of the U.S. (Figure 2.3). Thisforces a strong emphasis on solid waste management.

Picture a Landfill Here

United States61 per km2

The Netherlands459 per km2

Japan1616 per km2

Fig. 2.3. Japan has an extremely high population density, especially if adjusted for inhabitable area (asabove). This contributes to a concern for solid waste management (Rogers and Feiss 1998).


In 1998, the Japanese government passed a law calling for the recycling of specified kinds of electrical homeappliances, to take full effect by 2001. Under this law, manufacturers of television sets, refrigerators,washing machines, and air conditioners, that operate in Japan, are required to recycle a specified percentageof these discarded appliances. Hitachi (Appendix D) discussed this during the panel’s site visit. While thereis some interest in materials recycling technology, most of the research efforts that address recycling appearto be at the design level, with disassembly concerns receiving the highest priority. This appears to be thecase in both the electronics (Yokoyama and Iji 1998) and automotive industries (Yamamoto et al. 1999).

Another factor that contributes to Japan’s ability to embrace environmentally benign manufacturing is that itcan be viewed as simply another permutation of the quality movement that developed in Japan followingWorld War II. In addition to the engineering systems that it spawned, the focus on quality was also critical inthe development of methodologies and metrics to measure continuous improvements and in promotingexcellent data management. By requiring an emphasis on the supply chain (through monitoring of incomingquality) and the use and end-of-life phases (as functions of product reliability), the quality movement alsofacilitated the understanding of basic life-cycle principles. Environmental issues can be viewed as simplyanother set of product “qualities” to manage.

Japan has a history of adopting best practices from abroad and improving upon them. This tendency wasespecially drawn upon during the last half of the 19th century when Japan, after nearly three centuries ofisolation, made a rapid transition from a feudal, agrarian culture to an industrial one by means of quickadaptation of Western ideas and technologies (Yamazaki 1985; Clark 1979). This has significantly affectedJapanese manufacturing practices and contributes to their focus on applications, in both industry and inresearch. Traditionally, Japanese industry is quite skilled at importing the results of fundamental researchfrom the U.S. and making successful use of them in their products.

Japan also has a culture of consensus building, which promotes interaction between government, universities,and industry, and indeed within industry itself. This can be attributed to a variety of influences, including aConfucian-Buddhist heritage where community benefit and harmony are a high priority (in contrast to theWestern Judeo-Christian focus on individual accountability and responsibility). It may also be an artifact ofthe rapid industrial expansion that took place in the late 1800s. During this short period the ImperialJapanese government presented private enterprise with opportunity, subsidies, and tax breaks in order toaccelerate insertion of technology. This is in sharp contrast to the Western industrial revolution where therewas virtually no government involvement. The type of relationship that exists between Japanese companiesand the central government also has roots in the feudal Japanese “house” system, where households wereseparate political, economic, and legal units and the chief role of the Shogunate government was to supportand protect rather than to control (Clarke 1979).

OBSERVATIONS

United States

Most of the EBM focus in the U.S. is on materials and processes within the traditional manufacturingenvironment. This may be viewed as a logical response to media-based regulations and policy since theseareas and activities most directly affect air, water, and solid waste. The automotive industry has concentratedon the materials and processes used in structural metals and for paint application; the electronics industry hasconcerns over a number of materials and processes (Chapter 5). Those issues specific to the semiconductorindustry are noted in the AMD site report (Appendix E). However, where there are market drivers thatencourage consideration of products and end-of-life solutions, there are activities in U.S. industries withinthese areas as well. For example, large international firms such as Ford and IBM are responding aggressivelyto EU directives focusing on these areas (specifically the Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment(WEEE) and End-of-Life Vehicle (ELV) directives). Ford has designed a car specifically for European take-back. IBM has a strong electronics products recycling effort (http://www.ibm.com/environment) and hasproduced a computer using 100% recycled plastic housing.

Metrics and supply chain management are of concern in the U.S. but not nearly to the degree that wasobserved in Europe. In addition, the motivation appears to be different. Often it can be linked to concern


over potential future liability (especially with large chemical and electronics companies) or in response to acustomer (such as Johnson Controls responding to the automakers, Appendix E). However, there are someexceptions. Within large companies (e.g., DuPont, Ford, IBM, AT&T, HP) there are typically small groupsthat are very focused on systems level environmental issues. In addition, there are some smaller companiesthat view a systems level approach to managing environmental issues as a key strategy, such as Interface(Appendix E).

Kalundborg, Denmark is recognized as the premier site in the world for material exchanges, however there isalso significant interest and activity in the U.S. in this area. Of note are the activities that are occurring atTXU’s Chaparral Steel (Appendix E). Cornell University’s WEI program (http://www.cfe.cornell.edu/wei)focuses on eco-industrial park development. Its most recent conference (in February 2000) was at Red Hill,Miss., where a power plant is being built directly next to a lignite mine. Since virtually all transportationcosts are thus eliminated, this will allow a marginally economic, low-grade coal to be used. In addition, anursery grower plans to build greenhouses to make use of waste heat from the power plant. The U.S.Department of Energy (DOE) is working in cooperation with the Polymer Alliance Zone of West Virginia toestablish an eco-industrial park in Parkersburg, West Va., with a focus on recycling of electronics. Similarefforts are underway in Austin, Texas (funded by the Department of Commerce, EDA) and in BroomeCounty, New York (the Aurora Project, backed in part by IBM).

Recycling efforts in the U.S. are subject to the free market with variable results. (Note that for the purposesof this study, the discussion of recycling efforts is limited to engineered metals and polymers, and toautomotive and electronic applications). The U.S. continues to be the largest producer of solid waste, evenwhen normalized (Figure 2.4). However, until landfill space and/or costs become critical, as they have inJapan and Europe, it may be difficult to develop viable material recycling processes, except where there isclear economic advantage (such as for steel, aluminum, and precious/base metals). There are significantefforts in the U.S. to recycle certain polymers. DuPont has a pilot facility to recycle polyester and MBAPolymers is developing methods for recovering engineering thermoplastics such as acrylonitrile butadienestyrene (ABS) and polycarbonate (PC) (see Appendix E). However, the economics of both of these facilitieswas or is a challenge. In all cases within the U.S., companies must rely on their own initiative to collect andconsolidate materials, to recover materials in a cost-effective manner, and to find markets for their outputstreams.

0

200

400

600

800

Industrial WasteK tons per $M GDP

Municipal Waste(kg per capita)

US Japan EUFig. 2.4. When normalized (per capita for municipal and dollar for industrial), the U.S. is still the world’s

biggest producer of solid waste, with Japan producing nearly the same amount of industrial waste; dataare for 1990 (Park and Labys 1998).


At the research and development level, there is a much greater effort to investigate the recycling ofengineering thermoplastics that are a predominant material in both electronics and automotive applications.Perhaps this is because incineration is not as acceptable an option in the U.S. as it appears to be in Japan andEurope. The Society of Plastics Engineers (SPE) holds an annual conference with a very strong emphasis onseparation and recovery technologies. Options include separation by hydrocyclone (used by MBA Polymersin California and Butler-MacDonald in Indianapolis) and electrostatic properties, with systems available fromU.S. companies such as Carpco (http://www.carpco.com) and from the German company Hamos(http://hamos.com). The barriers to recycling of engineering thermoplastics has been the subject of ongoing“stakeholder dialogues” at Tufts University. This is discussed in greater detail in Chapter 5, Materials andProducts: Section D, Electronics.

European Union

The EU is concerned primarily with product end-of-life, infrastructure (supply chain and reverse logistics),elimination of materials of concern, and systems level modeling. This is in large part made possible by itsinsular nature, with the majority of imports and exports being between EU member states (Table 2.1). Take-back infrastructure is especially well developed in the Netherlands, as seen at MIREC (Appendix C) andother countries are expected to develop similar programs in the near future. These efforts are being driven inlarge part by the WEEE (Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment) Directive and by the ELV (End-of-LifeVehicle) Directive.

The EU is also a world leader in the area of life cycle assessment (LCA). An excellent reference to LCA canbe found at the EEA Web site (http://org.eea.eu.int). Indeed, there are a number of documents available thatdiscuss incorporation of LCA into business practices (Moll and Gee 1999; Skillius and Wennberg 1998), andDFE/LCA software tools were first introduced in the United Kingdom (Boustead) and France (Ecobilian orEcobalance). Delft University of Technology, in cooperation with Philips Electronics (Appendix C), has alsodone a significant amount of work in this area.

The only encounter the panel had with industry attempting to use renewable resources was atDaimlerChrysler in Stuttgart (Appendix C), where they had looked at using flax, sisal, and hemp as thereinforcing fiber in composites. One of the most intriguing aspects of this project was an attempt to look atthis from a life-cycle viewpoint, including working up the supply chain with the flax growers in order toensure a uniform material.

There appeared to be evidence of more collaborative relationships between government, industry, anduniversities in the EU countries the WTEC panel visited. Certainly, there seem to be more attempts at using“carrots” rather than “sticks.” And while some of the policies are met with skepticism (e.g., the WEEEDirective) if not downright refusal to cooperate, the government appears to offer more room for post-policynegotiation than in the U.S.

One interesting trend is the introduction of environmental taxes by member states (Table 2.3) onenvironmentally harmful products and activities (Roodman 2000). While the shifts have been small (Figure2.5) and the bulk of the revenue is from energy taxes (Figures 2.6 and 2.7), including transport fuels whichmake up more than three-quarters of energy taxes, there are clear indications that this is an increasing trend.In 1980, 5.84% of total revenue was derived from environmental taxes. This number had increased to 6.17%in 1990 and to 6.71% by 1997 (EEA 2000b). The tax base is also being broadened from “polluter pays” tothe more comprehensive “user pays.” For example, there are taxes on groundwater extraction in France,Germany, and the Netherlands. In addition to directly penalizing undesirable behaviors, it is hoped that thesetaxes will provide some level of social engineering and increase general awareness of environmental issues.


Table 2.3Examples of EU Environmental Taxes

Country, First yearin effect

TaxesCut On

TaxesRaised On

% Revenue Shifted

Sweden, 1991 Personal income Carbon and sulfur emissions 1.9

Denmark, 1994 Personal income Motor fuel, coal, electricity, and watersales; waste incineration andlandfilling; motor vehicle ownership

2.5

Spain, 1995 Wages Motor fuel sales 0.2

Denmark, 1996 Wages, agricultural property Carbon emissions from industry;pesticide, chlorinated solvent, andbattery sales

0.5

Netherlands, 1996 Personal income and wages Natural gas and electricity 0.8

UK, 1996 Wages Landfilling 0.1

Finland, 1996 Personal income and wages Energy sales, landfilling 0.5

Germany, 1999 Wages Energy sales 2.1

Italy, 1999 Wages Fossil fuel sales 0.2

Netherlands, 1999 Personal income Energy sales, landfilling, householdwater sales

0.9

France, 2000 Wages Solid waste; air and water pollution 0.1

UK, 2001 Wages Energy sales to industry 0.3

Source: Brown, Renner, and Halwell (2000).

Fig. 2.5. In the EU, the ratio of revenue from environmental taxes, compared to revenue from other taxesand social contributions, steadily increased, 1980-96. Environmental taxes are defined as energy taxes

(including taxes on transport fuels), transport taxes, and dedicated pollution taxes (EEA 2000a).


Fig. 2.6. Most of the environmental taxes, and most of the increase in taxes, in the EU are from energy taxes,including transport fuels, which make up more than three-quarters of energy taxes (EEA 2000a).

Fig. 2.7. 1997 revenue from environmental taxes in EU member states, as a percentage of total revenue andsocial contributions, shows that only the Netherlands, France, and Denmark have significant pollution

taxes, and that energy taxes are the most significant type in all 15 member states (EEA 2000a).


Japan

In the traditional manufacturing environment, Japan is focused on applications and products, and technicalsolutions tend to be at the operations level. One example of this is Toyo Seikan’s waste minimizationprogram and use of pre-coated steel in the manufacture of beverage cans. There is also evidence of earlyadoption of emerging (non-Japanese) technologies in new products; for example, Honda and Toyota were thefirst to introduce hybrid cars, and Sony and Hitachi manufacture a significant volume of printed wiringboards that use micro-via interconnects and bromine-free flame retardants (Appendix D). The manufactureof vinyl window frames using triple co-extrusion with a recycled PVC core demonstrates an innovativeapplication of existing materials and equipment (Appendix D). Progressive implementation of technologywas evident with the use of plastic as a reducing agent (also done in Germany).

As a country that relies heavily on marketing high-value-added consumer products to countries all over theworld, Japanese industry must be highly responsive to global policies. The most striking example of this isthe strong emphasis on ISO 14000, which was seen advertised in public areas, including mass transitsystems. Japanese electronics companies were the first to develop lead-free solders and offer bromine-freeprinted wiring boards in response to the EU’s WEEE Directive. Japan’s limited amount of natural resourcesand limited landfill space evokes a strong awareness of the relationship between conservation and economics(lean = green), as observed at Toyota and Toyo Seikan (Appendix D). Toyota claims that its highly efficientassembly line at Tsutsumi produces only 18 kg landfill waste per automobile. Fuji Xerox has a very wellimplemented program of component reuse.

Of the three regions studied, Japan appears to have the greatest concern with CO2 emissions and globalwarming. CO2 emissions are measured as a function of energy consumption, and since Japan has extremelyhigh energy costs, there is clear economic incentive as well as environmental incentive to be concerned withthis issue. However, given that most of Japan’s populace lives at or near sea-level, there may be concernover rising sea-levels as well.

Japan demonstrates a strong alignment of internal resources not seen in the other two regions. This manifestsitself as a unified response to EBM and is evident in the areas of public education, environmental leadership,and consensus building. There is also a commitment to public development of data and software tools suchas its national LCA project. In this effort the Japanese government is trying to develop a large LCA databasethat is specific to Japan and which is viewed as a national project (see the MITI site report, Appendix D).Hitachi representatives were particularly outspoken in their strong interest in systems integration.

The emphasis on recycling in Japan lies somewhere between that of the U.S. and the EU. Government isinvested in developing infrastructure for recycling (e.g., PVC from construction sites) and industry isbeginning to establish standards for recycled materials, such as PVC for non-pressurized wastewater pipes(Appendix D).

The WTEC panelists did not see much evidence of activity in the area of pollution prevention. This wassomewhat unexpected in light of Japan’s historical problems with industrial pollution. Rapidindustrialization in the last half of the 19th century contributed significantly to this problem; however,contamination of soil with base and heavy metals continued to be a problem well into the 20th century(McNeill 2000).

SUMMARY MATRICES

The following matrices were developed by consensus within the panel after completion of the site visits.They are subjective; but based on observations made during the year-long investigation, it is believed thatthey represent the relative trends within the three different regions in the areas of government, industry,research and development, and education. The number of asteriks in each cell are intended to be indicativeof level of effort and emphasis as much as actual level of success.


Table 2.4Government Activities


Take-back legislation ** — ****

Landfill bans ** * ***

Material bans * * **

LCA tool and database development *** ** ****

Recycling infrastructure ** * ***

Economic incentives ** * ***

Regulate by medium * ** *

Cooperative/joint efforts with industry ** * ****

Financial and legal liability * **** *

Table 2.5Industrial Activities


ISO 14000 certification **** * ***

Water conservation ** *** *

Energy conservation/CO2 emissions **** ** **

Decreased releases to air and water * *** **

Decreased solid waste/post-industrial recycling **** ** ***

Post-consumer recycling ** * ****

Material and energy inventories *** * **

Alternative material development ** * ***

Supply chain involvement ** * **

EBM as a business strategy **** ** ***

Life-cycle activities ** ** **

Table 2.6Research and Development Activities


Relevant Basic Research (> 5 years out)

Polymers ** *** **

Electronics ** *** *

Metals *** * **

Automotive/transportation ** * ***

Systems ** * ***

Applied R&D (< 5 years out)

Polymers * *** **

Electronics *** ** **

Metals *** * **

Automotive/transportation *** * ***

Systems ** * ***


Table 2.7Educational Activities


Courses ** ** ***

Programs * * **

Focused degree program — — *

Industry sponsorship * ** ***

Government sponsorship * * **

CONCLUSIONS

It is clear that cultural, geographic, and business needs all strongly influence practices in environmentallybenign manufacturing in the U.S., EU, and Japan. In the area of government, environmental regulations arerelatively new to both the newly formed EU and Japan, and there are historical precedents for cooperativeefforts between government and industry (in many areas, not just in the environment). Consequently, both ofthese regions tend to have a more proactive approach to problem solving than does the U.S. This approachlends itself well to long-term, systems-level efforts such as development of life-cycle inventory tools anddata. Take-back legislation and recycling laws in the EU and Japan are made possible by small, denselypopulated areas and the limited number of local governments within which consensus needs to be reached.These laws are also driven by the limited amount of area available for landfills. The U.S. has a long historyof environmental regulations that are focused on pollution of specific media (air, soil, and water). This,combined with a tendency towards litigation, is much more likely to produce “point” rather than systemssolutions. The governments of Japan and the EU are involved in infrastructure development and extendedproducer responsibility, which are almost completely absent at the Federal level in the U.S.

Corporations in the U.S. are very material and process oriented, and tend to place emphasis on decreasedresource consumption (especially water) and pollution prevention. While some of the larger, internationalfirms have started to incorporate environmental issues into business strategies, it is not nearly at the levelseen in Japan and the EU. Included in these strategies is a high priority placed on ISO 14000 certification.In the U.S., life-cycle analyses are becoming more prevalent, but they are done in a much more limitedcapacity than in the EU and might more properly be described as mass-energy balance activities. Japaneseindustry, in cooperation with the government, is very concerned with energy conservation (reduced CO2

emissions) and decreased solid waste, and this is reflected in the type of life-cycle analyses that areperformed there. However, there are clear economic as well as environmental drivers, including high energycosts and limited opportunities to landfill waste. European corporations are interested in alternative materialdevelopment, especially as these activities relate to systems level issues, including life-cycle assessment(LCA), particularly in the area of supply chain management and design for the environment (DFE), typicallyfor end-of-life issues. Post-consumer recycling has a high priority in light of take-back regulations anddecreased landfill space.

Research in the U.S. is heavily dependent upon industry objectives (especially introduction of newtechnologies) and is therefore focused on materials and processes. Japan’s efforts are more closely alignedwith applications, implementation, and manufacturing systems. European research is heavily weighted in theareas of implementation and systems engineering, particularly DFE and LCA.

In the European countries, higher education has begun to address EBM to a much greater degree than ineither the U.S. or Japan. The panel did not identify any degree programs in the U.S. There are a few formalprograms within conventional engineering programs, and courses at the graduate level are becoming morecommon.

Overall, it appears that environmentally benign manufacturing in the U.S. is somewhat behind that of the EUand Japan. However, because activities are more privatized within industry, and in many cases are viewed ascompetitive (both technically and from a marketing perspective), the level of effort may be less obvious. TheU.S. government is more reactive, rather than proactive, and as such there is less willingness to publicize its


activities, and more reluctance on the part of industry to collaborate on big-picture issues. It should beremembered, however, that the U.S. is a nation of crusaders. It does best when it has “an enemy.” There arenumerous instances where, largely through technical innovation and collaborative efforts, the U.S. has comefrom behind to mount a successful challenge. Examples are the automobile industry in the early 1980s andthe electronics industry in the early 1990s. In both cases there was a significant amount of industry andgovernment collaboration. It will simply take the U.S. government and industry, in cooperation witheducational systems, to determine that environmentally benign manufacturing is critical to our globaleconomic status and extended quality of life.

REFERENCES

Clark, R. 1979. The historical influences of the company. The Japanese Company. New Haven: Yale University Press,pp. 13–48.

European Environment Agency. 2000a. Environmental Signals 2000. Environmental taxes. European EnvironmentAgency Regular Indicator Report. 2000. pp. 96-98.

European Environment Agency. 2000b. Environmental Taxes: Recent Developments in Tools for Integration. EuropeanEnvironment Agency, Environmental Issue Series. No.18.

McNeill. J.R. 2000. Something New Under the Sun: An Environmental History of the Twentieth-century World. NewYork. W. W. Norton & Company.

Moll, S. and D. Gee (eds.). 1999. Making sustainability accountable: eco-efficiency, resource productivity andinnovation. Proc. of the Fifth Anniversary of the European Environment Agency Workshop. October 1998.

Park, S.E. and W.C. Labys. 1998. Industrial Development and Environmental Degradation: A Sourcebook on the Originsof Global Pollution. Cheltenham, UK. Edward Elgar.

Rogers, J.J.W. and P.G. Feiss. 1998. People and the Earth. Cambridge, UK. Cambridge University Press.

Roodman, D.M. 2000. Environmental tax shifts multiplying. Vital Signs 2000. Brown, L.R., Renner, M., and Halwell,eds. New York: W.W. Norton and Company.

Skillius, A. and U. Wennberg. 1998. Continuity, Credibility and Comparability: Key Challenges for CorporateEnvironmental Performance Measurement and Communication. International Institute for Industrial EnvironmentalEconomics at Lund University.

Thurow, L.C. 1985. The impact of Japanese culture on management. The Management Challenge: Japanese View.Thurow, L.C., ed.. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. pp. 39–41.

U.S. Central Intelligence Agency. 2000. See http://www.odci.gov. Downloaded July 11.

Yamamoto, H., S. Shibata, and H.C. Neijenhuis. 1999. Inverse factory for end-of-life cars: complete dismantling system.Proc. EcoDesign ’99: First International Symposium on Environmentally Conscious Design and InverseManufacturing. Feburary. Tokyo, pp.942–945.

Yamazaki, M. 1985. The impact of Japanese culture on management. The Management Challenge: Japanese Views.Thurow, L.C., ed. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

Yokoyama, S. and M. Iji. 1998. Recycling system for printed wiring boards with mounted parts. NEC Research &Development: Special Issue on Environmental Technolog. April. Vol 39, No. 2. pp. 111-117.

23

CHAPTER 3

STRATEGIC VISION

David T. Allen

INTRODUCTION

In order to identify critical research needs in environmentally benign manufacturing (EBM), it is firstnecessary to define the objectives of EBM and to identify the forces driving its implementation. If thisstrategic framing of goals is not done, then EBM becomes just a collection of loosely connectedtechnologies. The panel observed, worldwide, that many companies are struggling with the challenges ofdefining and implementing key facets of EBM. Yet, common issues and approaches emerged, and thischapter will report on those elements. Specifically, these include identification of environmental objectivesthat are viewed as strategic by companies worldwide, the forces that are driving companies to address theseissues, the metrics with which to measure improvement, and the response of the research community inidentifying knowledge gaps. An excellent discussion of this, as it applies to any industry sector, is includedin the 1994 Electronics Environmental Roadmap (MCC 1994).

EBM ENVIRONMENTAL OBJECTIVES

An almost infinite array of environmental objectives can be considered in designing products andmanufacturing systems that are environmentally benign. These objectives may address concerns at themanufacturing level, such as avoiding hazardous waste generation and reducing the emissions of smogprecursors, or they may address larger life cycle issues such as designing products that are easilydisassembled for parts and material recovery at end-of-life. In a workshop held at the Microelectronics andComputer Technology Corporation (MCC) in 1997, a panel of original equipment manufacturers (OEMs)developed the following list of environmental objectives (MCC 1997):

• Disposition (planning for recovery): maximum recovery/reuse at the end-of-life

• Energy conservation: reduced energy consumption throughout the product’s life cycle

• Materials of concern: reduced use of materials of concern through the product’s life cycle

• Natural resource conservation: increased materials efficiency throughout the product’s life cycle andreduced reliance on non-renewable or resources that are not obtained through sustainable processes

• Product life extension: increased product life (reduced use of resources per unit of service delivered)

• User health and safety: products present no health or safety hazards to the user

These are in close alignment with the observations made by the panel during the course of this study. Thecommon EBM objectives worldwide were noted to be:

• Reducing energy and material consumption

• Waste reduction and reduced use of materials of concern

3. Strategic Vision24

• Reducing the magnitude and impacts of product packaging

• Managing products that are returned to manufacturers at the end of their designed use

• Customer demands for documented environmental management systems (EMS)

Because of the wide variety of environmental objectives that could be considered, an equally wide array oftechnologies might be required to achieve EBM. For example, if hazardous waste minimization were thedesired objective, then chemical reaction and separation technologies would be critical. In contrast, ifdealing with products at the end of their designed use were the desired objective, then disassemblyalgorithms would be critical. Thus, to identify critical technologies and knowledge gaps, the panel examinedthe types of environmental objectives driving EBM.

DRIVERS FOR EBM ENVIRONMENTAL OBJECTIVES

Many different forces drive environmental policy and strategy. In some cases the demand for theseobjectives comes from the manufacturers themselves (e.g., increased material and energy efficiency). Inother cases, the demand comes from customers (e.g., demand for EMS systems) or through environmentalregulation (e.g., end-of-life product take-back). Motorola has developed a table that maps environmentalobjectives against drivers (Figure 3.1)(Pfahl 2000).

Fig. 3.1. Motorola has developed the above matrix to map EBM environmental objectives against drivers.

While perhaps not laid out in this specific format, this general approach appears to be behind much of thedevelopment of EBM strategies worldwide. Thus, expanding upon the Motorola example, the issues anddriving forces shown in Table 3.1 are the key ones identified by the panel during site visits in the U.S., EUand Japan. The elements within Table 3.1 are intentionally left blank, since the panel found that theimportance of various environmental objectives, as well as the forces driving companies toward theseobjectives, varied from region to region and from sector to sector. For example, in the EU, new regulationsrequiring the take-back of electronic products by original equipment manufacturers and material recoveryregulations for scrapped automobiles are driving product design in these sectors. Since Japanese and U.S.manufacturers of electronic products and automobiles have a large market share in the EU, this emphasis isseen worldwide. Other industry sectors not addressed by this panel (such as pulp and paper) would likelyhave minimal concern with this environmental objective. Within the sectors studied (automotive andelectronics) reduced use of materials of concern is currently a much more important objective in theelectronics industry than in the automotive industry. This is largely due to the EU directive that calls for

David T. Allen 25

virtual elimination of cadmium, lead, and certain brominated flame retardants (see Chapter 5, electronicssection). Globally, energy and material consumption is much more of a concern in Japan (in large part due toeconomic drivers) than in the U.S. (see Chapter 2 for more discussion).

Table 3.1Issues and Drivers for EBM

Consumers GovernmentRegulationsand Policies

Non-governmentOrganizations

SupplyChain

Economics

Energy and material consumption

Waste reduction and reduced use ofmaterials of concern

Product packaging

Producer responsibility and take-back

Environmental management systems(ISO 14000)

Integrated product policy

METRICS FOR MONITORING EBM ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS AND PROGRESS

In addition to defining the objectives and drivers within an EBM strategy, the means with which to measurecontinuous improvement in environmental quality are often complex and challenging. Bridges toSustainability, a non-profit organization with a focus on the chemical industry, has a metrics projectdeveloped in cooperation with DOE’s Industries of the Future program. In May 2000, the group hosted atwo-day workshop entitled “Sustainability Metrics.” A summary of the workshop is available online athttp://www.bridgestos.org/news.htm#workshop. In another workshop hosted by MCC, “Making Design-For-Environment and Life-Cycle Assessment Work” (MCC 1997), a list of metrics was agreed upon by a largegroup of electronics OEMs and suppliers (Table 3.2).

Table 3.2List of EBM Metrics Recommended by Electronics OEMs and Suppliers

• commodity material value

• composition of materials of concern (includingpersistent, mined, and regulated materials)

• disassembly time and cost

• emissions (e.g., EMF) during use

• energy consumption during production

• energy consumption during use

• ergonomics

• expandability/upgradability

• landfill fraction

• material identification/ marking

• number of materials

• process efficiency relating to material balance

• public perception/opinion (as in the cases of PVC,radiation, and perceived toxicity)

• recoverability

• recyclability

• recycled content

• reliability

• resource consumption

• reusability

• serviceability/service requirements

• size

• standardization of parts

• toxicity in processing

• toxicity in product

• use of material of concern in processing

• use of renewable/non-renewable resources

• useful life (MTTR, MTTF)

• volume/nature of maintenance materials

• weight


The National Academy of Engineering (NAE) has also explored this issue in four different sectors:automotive, chemical, electronics, and pulp and paper. It divides metrics into four groups: supply chain,facility centered, product centered, and sustainability. As is typical in the U.S. (Chapter 2 of this report), theNAE approach is very media centered and emphasizes impact on air, water, and land. The study also makesa number of recommendations including the following overarching goals (CIEPM 2000).

• Adopt quantitative environmental goals

• Improve methods of ranking and prioritizing environmental impacts

• Improve the comparability or standardization of metrics

• Expand the development and use of metrics

• Develop metrics that keep pace with new understanding of sustainability

IMPLEMENTING EBM: IDENTIFYING RESEARCH NEEDS

Given the sets of environmental objectives driving EBM, companies are responding by creating andimplementing new design tools and new technologies. The panel observed a number of common elementsamong companies, worldwide, that are attempting to implement EBM. These knowledge and tool gapsinclude:

• lack of tools to examine trade-offs between environmental issues, and between environmental issues andissues such as cost and quality

• lack of consistent data and metrics on the environmental attributes of materials

• need for certain key technologies, specific to individual industrial sectors

(Note that this list could be expanded if the development of new high performance business practices toaddress EBM were included as well. These topics, which include such issues as supply chain coordinationand communication, goals alignment, performance tracking, etc., are discussed later in this report in Chapters4 and 6.)

These research needs have been articulated in research roadmaps that define key gaps, opportunities andpriorities. The development of research roadmaps and strategic planning documents has become increasinglycommon in both public and private sectors, particularly in interdisciplinary areas such as environmentallybenign manufacturing. The panel found a number of examples in the United States and Europe of roadmapsand strategic research plans focusing either directly or peripherally on EBM. (A summary of these is given athttp://itri.loyola.edu/ebm/usws/ind_summary.htm.)

In the United States, the Department of Energy’s Office of Industrial Technologies has been developing avariety of research roadmaps through its Vision 2020 program. This program, called “Industries of theFuture,” focuses on a group of energy intensive industrial sectors (agriculture, aluminum, chemicals, forestproducts, glass, metal casting, mining, petroleum, and steel). With DOE sponsorship and coordination,leaders in these industries and researchers in industrial, governmental and academic laboratories have createda strategic vision of the future of these industry sectors and have identified critical research needed to achievethe vision. The form of the reports is exemplified by the documents generated by the chemical industrysector. For the chemicals sector, the overall vision is articulated in a single document (“Technology Vision2020: The U.S. Chemical Industry,” available at www.oit.doe.gov/chemicals). In addition, specific researchneeds have been identified in a series of documents, ranging in coverage from new process chemistries toseparations technologies. Topics covered include alternative media, conditions, and raw materials, catalysis,computational chemistry, computational fluid dynamics, and separations. A complete list of documents isavailable from the DOE’s Industries of the Future Web site (www.oit.doe.gov/industries.shtml). While theseroadmaps are not exclusively focused on environmentally benign manufacturing, much of the strategic visionfor these energy and material intensive industries involves decreasing energy consumption and reducingwastes.

David T. Allen 27

The electronics industry has also developed a set of research roadmaps that define critical research needs inenvironmentally benign manufacturing. Examples are:

• 1996 Electronics Industry Environmental Roadmap (MCC) (available at www.mcc.com/projects/env/roadmap/roadmap.toc.html)

• National Electronics Manufacturing Technology Roadmaps (1998) (NEMI) (www.nemi.org/Roadmap/index.html)

• National Technology Roadmap for Semiconductors (1999) (SIA) (public.itrs.net)

• Lead-free soldering roadmap (1998) (JEIDA) (www.leadfree.org)

• National Technology Roadmap for Electronic Interconnects (1999) (IPC) (www.ipc.org/)

Among the features that distinguish these roadmaps from others in the United States is their use of data onenvironmental impacts throughout product life cycles (raw material extraction to final product recycling ordisposal) and their promotion of life cycle tools as part of the research agenda. The 1996 ElectronicsIndustry Environmental Roadmap, for example, draws upon a prior study which looked at a streamlined lifecycle study of a computer workstation (MCC 1993). A computer workstation is a complex product involvingan enormous range of materials and components. It would be extremely difficult to conduct a full assessmentof all of the environmental impacts of all of the material use, energy use and emissions associated with aproduct such as a workstation. Yet, these data can prove extremely useful in identifying areas forenvironmental improvement. The workstation components considered in the MCC study included thecathode ray tube (display), plastic housings, semiconductors, and printed wiring boards. A streamlined lifecycle assessment was able to identify, for a variety of environmental categories, which workstationcomponents were of primary concern. For example, product disposal was a dominant issues for cathode raytubes. Hazardous waste generation was dominant in semiconductor manufacturing. Energy use wasdominant in the consumer use stage of the life cycle. Surprisingly, considering the final size of an integratedcircuit, semiconductor manufacturing was identified as a significant factor in material use (due to materialthat is wasted rather than what is included in the actual product).

Results for the manufacturing phase are summarized in Figure 3.2. The study was used to guide research andtechnology development for the microcomputer industry.

0

0.25

0.5

0.75

1

Water

Waste Material

Material Use

Energy

SemiconductorDevices

SemiconductorPackaging

Printed WiringBoards &Computer

Assemblies

Displays

Fra

ctio

n of

Tot

al

Fig. 3.2. Relative energy use, material use, waste generation, and water use are shown for the manufacturingphase of the computer workstation life cycle.

The automotive industry is currently working with the American Plastics Council to develop a roadmap forplastics used in automobiles. It will include a section on recycling of engineering thermoplastics andinclusion of recycled plastic into new components. The Automotive Part Rebuilders Association (APRA)


has developed a roadmap facilitated by DOE’s Office of Industrial Technology (OIT), which can be obtainedonline at APRA’s Web site (www.apra.org/Promoting_Industry/Roadmap/roadmap.htm). The Steel IndustryTechnology Roadmap has a strong focus on environmental issues including recycling for the automotiveindustry (www.steel.org/mt/roadmap/roadmap.htm). The automotive consortium, USCAR, has a number ofexcellent references available electronically (Table 3.3).

Table 3.3USCAR Websites

Topic Website Comments

General description http://www.uscar.org/consortia/con-erc.htmhttp://www.USCAR.com

CERP metal casting project http://www.uscar.org/techno/cerp.htm see CERP site report, Appendix E

Mist reduction project http://www.uscar.org/techno/mist.htm see Ford site report, Appendix E

Specific technologies http://www.uscar.org/techno/index.htm many are environmentally oriented

Recycling reuse and recovery http://www.uscar.org/techno/rrr.htm

Vehicle Recycling Partnership http://www.uscar.org/consortia/con-vrp.htm

U.S. Automotive MaterialsPartnership

http://www.uscar.org/techno/lciwrapup.htm,http://www.uscar.org/techno/lci.htm,http://www.uscar.org/techno/env_7-97.htm

Several articles on life-cycle studies

During their site visits, panelists learned of a number of research roadmaps focusing on EBM that have beendeveloped in Europe. Among the most comprehensive were plans developed by the European Commission’sDirectorate for Science Research and Technology. The plans are described in detail at the Directorate’s Website (www.cordis.lu). As an example of the type of strategic planning conducted by the Commission,consider one of the Directorate’s programs that is most relevant to EBM—the program on “Competitive andSustainable Growth,” which is described in detail at www.cordis.lu/growth/src/cwp_en. The program has aset of “key actions” that concentrate research and technology development on clearly defined social andeconomic challenges. The four key actions are:

• Efficient production including design, manufacturing and control

• Intelligent production

• Eco-efficient processes and design

• Organization of production and work

The projects address these key areas and fall into the categories of:

• Products of the future

• Advanced functional materials

• New generation of machines

• The extended enterprise

• The modern factory

• Infrastructures

The EC Directorate uses a number of tools to set strategic direction. To provide an overview of researchneeds, the directorate funds “virtual research institutes” that suggest strategic directions for research. Theseare complemented by a number of industrial/academic networks that provide more technical insight anddirection on research needs. Approximately 100 of these networks exist; many are Web based; many of theWeb sites are cited at the directorate home page. Finally, most research is funded in the form of consortia,which generally include industrial partners who help fund the research (approximately 50% in a typicalconsortium) and set research directions.

David T. Allen 29

Other models for setting EBM research directions were observed in the German Fraunhofer institutes. Theinstitutes visited by the panel were, in general, focused on specific technologies or industry sectors. Forexample, the panel visited institutes for polymer testing and polymer science, reliability and micro-integration, manufacturing, and chemical technologies, among others. While the institutes were notspecifically directed at environmental issues, virtually all of these institutes had some level of effort aimed atcollecting life-cycle environmental data. In some institutes the life-cycle data were used to identify researchopportunities. For example, at the Institute for Polymer Testing and Polymer Science, a series of life-cyclestudies of automotive parts made of steel, aluminum and plastics helped identify part systems for whichplastics use would be advantageous. Similar life-cycle studies of construction and building materials helpedidentify new opportunities.

In Japan, some of the most comprehensive strategic planning has been developed within companies. Forexample, Toyota has developed environmental purchasing guidelines for its suppliers, has identified paintingoperations and machining as high priorities for manufacturing waste reduction, and tracks and controls morethan 200 substances. Toyota’s approach was consistent with that of other Japanese companies, whereenvironmentally benign manufacturing, and energy and resource utilization efficiency are regarded as naturalextensions of lean manufacturing.

SUMMARY

To summarize, the panel found that in Japan companies were driving the strategic development ofenvironmentally benign manufacturing, with the involvement of government and universities. In Europe,university based research institutes and governmental organizations, in collaboration with the private sector,are driving research and development in EBM. The United States uses a combination of both the Japaneseand European approaches; some of the most exciting innovations are occurring in companies, and somegovernment/industry partnerships, such as the DOE’s Vision 2020 program, are developing researchroadmaps. Unlike in Europe, however, U.S. universities remain relatively disengaged from the researchplanning and roadmapping process.

REFERENCE

Committee on Industrial Environmental Performance Metric (CIEPM). 2000. Executive Summary. IndustrialEnvironmental Performance Metrics: Challenges and Opportunites. Committee on Industrial EnvironmentalPerformance Metrics. National Academy of Engineering and National Research Council. Washington, DC. NationalAcademy Press, pp. 1 – 16.

Microelectronics and Computer Technology Corporation (MCC). 1993. Environmental Consciousness: A StrategicCompetitiveness Issue for the Electronics and Computer Industry: A Life Cycle Environmental Assessment of aComputer Workstation. MCC Technical Report. The Microelectronics and Computer Technology Corporation.p. 359.

Microelectronics and Computer Technology Corporation (MCC). 1994. Electronics Industry Environmental Roadmap.MCC Technical Report. The Microelectronics and Computer Technology Corporation. p. 108.

Microelectronics and Computer Technology Corporation (MCC). 1997. Making Design-For-Environment and Life-CycleAssessment Work: Workshop and Study Report, September 30 – October 1, 1997. MCC Technical Report. TheMicroelectronics and Computer Technology Corporation.

Pfahl, R.C. 2000. “Green electronics: trends in the U.S.” Key Note Lecture, Electronics Goes Green 2000+, Berlin.


31

CHAPTER 4

SYSTEMS LEVEL ISSUES

Deborah Thurston and Bert Bras

SUMMARY

This section describes the systems level issues that were discovered by the panel, and a set ofrecommendations for further research. First, the motivating factors are discussed, focusing on the joint effectsof legislation, economic efficiency, and marketing. Next, the need for a systems approach is illustratedthrough the complexity of environmentally benign manufacturing (EBM) issues. The next section describesseveral general approaches to EBM observed by the panel, along with the current limitations of eachapproach. The final recommendations section summarizes and describes specific needs for further research inmodeling, economics, information and the technological components of systems analysis.

INTRODUCTION

“System” is defined as “a regularly interacting or interdependent group of items forming a unified whole”(Webster’s 1974). Within the context of environmentally benign manufacturing (EBM), the group of itemsincludes environmental, technical, economic and legislative issues, as well as human aspirations and values,which form the unified whole of the global environment. Table 4.1 lists the motivating factors for interest inenvironmentally benign manufacturing. Early regulatory mandates focused on control of emissions,employing a media-based (air, water and solid waste) approach. Manufacturers’ early efforts inenvironmentally conscious behavior were thus focused on “end-of-pipe” treatment and waste disposalsystems. Similarly, worker exposure motivated point-of-contact worker protection systems, which preventedor minimized worker exposure to harmful materials and/or processes. A new trend is product take-backlegislation, which places the logistic and economic burden of product disposal on the manufacturer. This hasrecently been enacted by the Dutch, with the European economic community soon to follow.

Economic forces further motivate pro-active EBM behavior beyond simple regulatory compliance. Oneconsistent theme the panel observed was interest in the correlation between environmentally benignmanufacturing technologies and economic efficiency. At several site visits, the host stressed that the EBMtechnology developed was also more profitable. This is accomplished in several ways. First, if “end-of-pipe”emissions can be decreased, significant savings in waste treatment and disposal costs can be realized. The“Pollution Prevention Pays” program at the 3M company sought to exploit such opportunities. U.S.manufacturers currently spend approximately $170 billion per year in waste treatment and disposal costs.

Second, some manufacturers have realized that products and processes that generate large amounts of wasteare, by definition, inefficient and costly. Many EBM technologies consume less raw materials and/or energy,resulting in simultaneous environmental protection and cost savings. In other words, “lean = green.” Whilethis is extremely promising, it is also a much more complex “concurrent engineering” problem than simplytreating waste at the “end of pipe” in response to regulations. It requires thoughtful analysis long before the

4. Systems Level Issues32

manufacturing process begins, and even long before the product is designed. Another economic motivator isthat the manufacturer that is first to develop a cost-effective product or system that complies with anticipatedproduct take-back legislation will have a competitive advantage in the marketplace, as well as an enhancedcorporate image.

Table 4.1Motivating Factors for EBM

Regulatory Mandates

Emissions standards (air, water, solid waste)

Worker exposure standards

Product take-back requirements, banned materials

Competitive Economic Advantage

Waste treatment and disposal ($170 billion/year in U.S.)

Resource consumption and costs—energy, water, materials

First to achieve cost-effective product take-back system, reduced liability

Green Marketing

Corporate image

ISO 14001

EPA Toxic Release Inventory (TRI)

Market value of company

Dow Jones Sustainability Group Index

Investor Responsibility Research Center

Eco-labeling, employee satisfaction

Beyond the immediate economics of the manufacturing process, larger scale marketing considerations alsomotivate EBM. Factors cited by leading EBM manufacturers include the importance of maintaining anenvironmentally responsible corporate image, high level directives from a corporate leader and customerdemand. The regulatory complexities of an increasingly global economy have motivated several EBMleaders to define their own pro-active environmental goals that go far beyond minimum compliance withvarying local regulations. Another motivating factor is investors. The correlation between the market value ofthe company and its environmental management program is only beginning to be studied, but several groupshave begun gathering data to help identify companies that emphasize social responsibility, such as the DowJones Sustainability Group Index and the Investor Responsibility Research Center. Initial analyses indicate acorrelation between social responsibility and long-term profitability.

Because of the intricate interplay between regulatory, technical, economic and other factors, environmentallybenign manufacturing requires a systems level approach. Technological competence and good intentionsalone do not assure success; a systems approach is essential. For example, Volvo succeeded in developingand implementing technology for “the world’s cleanest paint line,” utilizing water-based chemistry.However, energy price increases forced a more comprehensive systems analysis, which revealed that the costand environmental impact resulting from the “clean” paint line’s energy consumption arguably outweighedthe decrease in paint line emissions. Another example is the failure of German recyclers who, althoughtechnologically competent, were financially unsuccessful because the enactment of product take-backregulations came too late to provide feedstock. Lessons learned include the necessity of including allenvironmental impacts in the analysis, including those of energy consumption, energy costs, timing andlocation of regulations.

The next section further discusses the complexity of systems issues in EBM. Section three describessystems-based approaches and their limitations, and the final section describes specific recommendations forneeds in the systems area.

Deborah Thurston and Bert Bras 33

THE COMPLEXITY OF SYSTEMS ISSUES

The increasing complexity of EBM is illustrated in Figure 4.1, which compares the environmental andorganizational scales of environmental protection approaches (Bras 1997). The vertical scale indicates thescope of organizational concern, ranging from the manufacturing facility at the origin, through a group of Xmanufacturers, to society as a whole. The horizontal scale indicates the corresponding length of the timescale, ranging from the time during the manufacturing process, through the product life cycle, to the span ofcivilization. The scales are not linear but indicate important distinctions between approaches.

In the lower left corner, traditional pollution prevention efforts are mapped that most often focus onelimination of pollutants from existing products and process technologies—the temporal scope is on theorder of manufacturing process and the organizational scope is usually the manufacturing group/department.Traditional environmental engineering, although broadening, is primarily concerned with managing the fate,transport, and control of contaminants at the end of the manufacturing process (“end of pipe”), but stillrequires involvement of the entire manufacturing group.

Figure 4.1 indicates the complexities that must be overcome if one wishes to move from the lower left corner(pollution prevention) to the upper right corner and achieve sustainable development. Sustainabledevelopment is defined as “development that meets the needs of the present generation withoutcompromising the needs of future generations” (UN “Brundtland” Commission 1987). Both the Europeansand the Japanese have progressed further than the United States. beyond the lower left corner and are indeedtaking a more comprehensive, systems view of environmentally benign manufacturing. Specifically, (1)product take- back and recycling are actively pursued to avoid landfill disposal, (2) life-cycle analyses areperformed to reduce environmental impact over the entire product life, and (3) strong collaborations betweenstakeholders (suppliers, recyclers, governmental bodies, etc.) are established. One might argue that thesesteps are easier to take where transportation distances are shorter and the culture is less diverse (seeChapter 2).

Sca

le o

f Org

aniz

atio

nal C

once

rn

Scale of Temporal Concern

Sin

gle

Pro

duct

Life

Cyc

le X Products

One Manufacturer

Society

Manufacturing

Use

Disposal

Product Life Cycle

Human Lifetime

Civilization Span

X Manufacturers

Manufacturing Use Disposal

1: Environmental Engineering 2: Pollution Prevention 3: Envir. Conscious D&M 4: Design for the Environment 5: Life Cycle Design 6: Industrial Ecology 7: Sustainable Development

21

3,4,5

6

7

Fig. 4.1. Environmental and organizational scales of environmental impact reduction approaches(Bras 1997).


CURRENT SYSTEMS APPROACHES

Product Take-Back and Recycling

Current Status

One of the best examples of a systems approach is product take-back and recycling operations. Here, manyelements of an inter-connected system must be put into place and coordinated in order to assure success.Clearly, the Dutch initiatives in requiring product take-back and recycling systems in order to reduce landfillhave demonstrated that it is possible to implement a working take-back system for electronics (see theMIREC site report). Furthermore, the European Commission legislation on electronics take-back will mostlikely follow the Dutch model, except EC legislation is expected to be stricter—for example, includingmedical equipment. Hence, in Europe it was observed that manufacturers no longer question the issue ofproduct take-back, but rather are focusing their energies on identifying the best approach. Japanesemanufacturers are similarly focused on cost-effective compliance with pending European, as well asJapanese, take-back legislation. While the Japanese are perhaps even more space-limited in general than theEuropeans, their primary motivation appears to be European legislation, since that is a large portion of theirmarket.

Lessons learned are that a successful take-back system must be rooted in an economically viable approach tobe self-sustaining. For example, MIREC’s recommendation was to find markets for materials first, thenrecycle. A successful system also requires cooperation between many stakeholders, including thegovernment, communities, consumers, manufacturers, and recyclers.

The Dutch also learned that consumers did not object to paying a “disposal fee” at point of purchase. A 25guilder fee (approximately $10) on a $300 refrigerator or TV did not appear to affect consumers’ purchasingdecisions. One reason cited was that it was a relatively small increase compared to the cost of the product.Furthermore, the fee was levied on all products, hence, no competitive disadvantage was created.

Regarding the recycling process itself, it was observed that state-of-the-art reprocessing is still highlydependent on low-skilled manual labor (for sorting, disassembly, inspection). As such, the recycling/reuseindustry is also seen as an opportunity to create new jobs to lower unemployment, especially in Germany.The U.S. appears to lead in mechanical separation technologies (see MBA Polymers site report).

Limitations

There are several difficulties encountered when developing a product take-back and recycling system. First,setting up the “reverse logistics” network can be very challenging. There is a need for better reprocessingtechnologies, particularly for polymer composites. Specialty materials and reinforcing materials in polymercomposites often create a nuisance in the recycling process. Standardizing material types would facilitaterecycling, but would also inhibit development of new materials that might improve product performance.

Use of recycled materials in the manufacturing process poses a number of problems. Some recycled “raw”materials are more expensive than their virgin counterparts, particularly for some polymers. Quality controlis made more difficult when the range of material properties is greater due to contaminants and varyingfeedstocks.

Only a handful of products are currently designed to facilitate recycling. For example, flat-panel displayshave been developed and are gaining wide market entry without consideration of their recyclability. Finally,the recycling process can also create its own environmental impact, resulting from transportation, facilitiesconstruction, facilities operations and waste generation.

Design for Environment Observations by Region

The increased emphasis on systems thinking, driven in part by the fact that end-of-life issues are now to betaken into consideration during product design, has led to what is often referred to as “design forenvironment” (DFE). Synonymous phrases include “environmentally conscious design” or “green design.”


The interest in DFE is growing worldwide. In Japan, DFE is strongly correlated to a culturally ingrainedsense of avoiding waste and conserving limited resources, as observed during visits to Toyota and ToyoSeikan (see site reports). Lack of space is a key motivator in Japan. This explains the emphasis on avoidinglandfills by means of incineration and take-back initiatives.

In Japan, there is a strong emphasis on the development of DFE tools. Hitachi demonstrated severalexamples, as did the governmental laboratories. One of Hitachi’s most active projects is inversemanufacturing, supported by MITI. Several tools shown were focused on design for disassembly and designfor recycling, and NEC is also developing its own life-cycle analysis tool. One goal is to integrate life-cycleanalyses into CAD systems. A key reason for in-house development is, interestingly enough, the languagebarrier: in order to introduce DFE and LCA tools, Japanese companies need a tool written in Japanese ratherthan English. Lead-free soldering methods are also being investigated.

Another key problem observed was the lack of integration with other design and management tools andpractices. The sense of priority seems still to be with cost and quality at the engineering level, and hosts atHitachi and other sites indicated that DFE is not completely adopted and prevalent throughout Japanesecorporations. The connection with management tools also is lacking (still). It was very interesting to note thatNEC had never investigated the economic payoff of its environmental R&D laboratory in its 29 years ofexistence, until last year. Instead, management sees environmental efforts as part of “being a good citizen.”

In Europe, DFE was also prevalent, but several industrial sites that the WTEC team visited also emphasizedthat DFE should not be a stand-alone activity, but integrated throughout the product realization process. Still,there was no “magic” solution for how to integrate it throughout the business. At Volvo, this was cited asbeing a problem. Along similar lines, DaimlerChrysler representatives stated that having experts at thecorporate level only did not work; experts need to be at the business unit level, close to the engineers andmanagers who are directly involved with the product and process design and management issues. It seemedthat for most companies a primary motivator was “success stories” where environmental thinking was alsobeneficial to the bottom line in some way.

In general, EBM is seen by many in Europe and Japan as a natural extension of lean manufacturing and/orconcurrent engineering, whereas in the United States, it is still often viewed as a separate activity with no“value-added.” The European EBM/DFE support strategies appear to have evolved into a group of experts atthe corporate R&D level, with few dedicated DFE/EBM experts at the business unit/manufacturing plantlevel. Integration with company-wide information systems (and beyond to suppliers) is being pursued.

In Europe, two studies were performed which focused on small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) thathighlighted the importance of economic and environmental win-win situations even more. In a Dutch study,it was reported that SMEs were frequently eager to be helped, but that as soon as the consultants left, themotivator seemed to have gone as well. The reasons cited were that SMEs tend to think short-term and do nothave many resources to spare. A recent Swedish study confirmed this (see IVF site report). An unresolvedissue, therefore, is how to create the motivation for self-sustaining efforts after initial analyses have beenperformed by an external party.

From an education perspective, European universities seemed to be further ahead in integrating DFE intotheir curricula. Both in Europe and Japan, there are several ongoing research efforts, major nationalinitiatives, and conferences addressing DFE issues. However, in Japan, DFE is not yet integrated into thecurricula, and is mainly driven by elective courses and individual faculty interest.

In DFE and EBM alike, typical questions posed are:

• What is the environmental impact?

• Where does it occur most?

• What should we do about it?

• What is it going to cost us?


Hence, assessment tools are crucial and should ideally be easily validated, easy to use, objective,reproducible and enhance understanding. Throughout, it is generally agreed that one should not focus on onelife-cycle aspect solely, but take a systems and life-cycle perspective.

Life-Cycle Analysis

Current Status

Life-cycle assessment (or analysis) is defined in ISO 14040 as “Compilation and evaluation of the inputs,outputs and the potential environmental impacts of a product system throughout its life.” It was observed thatLCA is widely used in Europe. In Japan it is less widely used, although there are apparent national efforts todevelop LCA tools. A key motivator is ISO 14000 certification. To support LCA, there are a wide variety ofsoftware packages available—e.g., Volvo’s Environmental Priority System, the Dutch-developed Eco-Indicator (embodied in Simapro software), and several extensive databases plus software tools (e.g., Gabi)that have been developed in Germany. However, LCA is mostly done by experts, either internal (e.g.,corporate R&D) or (hired) external consultants. Furthermore, the LCA tools are not integrated with otheranalyses yet. Siemens cited this as being a problem.

Limitations

A problem with LCA that was mentioned during the visit to the Technical University of Delft is that there isno general consensus on a “standard” metric for measuring environmental impact, and thus a wide variety ofinterpretations are possible. In Europe, some companies have been promoting a “universal” single impactmeasure as provided by the Dutch Eco-Indicator, but this was met with strong opposition because many feltthat this would result in using LCA more as a competitive tool than as a tool for true environmental impactimprovement. Nevertheless, common criticisms regarding LCA are that it is not tied to business perspectives,too academic, too vague, difficult to perform, etc. Key, of course, is lack of data. In the Netherlands, theopinion was voiced that LCA has a problem in that it does not capture “value.” Nevertheless, there does notappear to be any viable alternative, and LCA seemed to be well established in all major companies visited.Even more, certain Scandinavian governments now require that an LCA study be performed as part of a bidon a contract.

Win-Win Situations

Current Status

One of the most promising aspects of the systems approach involves strategies that simultaneously decreasepollution and improve profitability. One example commonly cited is the Xerox Corporation, which was ableto realize a $200 million profit by spending $10 million to recycle toner cartridges. Another example wasobserved during the Toyo Seikan site visit, where the panel observed a new stretch drawing process forforming thin-walled steel cans. A tin-free steel is laminated with polyester film, eliminating the need forpainting, lubricants, coolant water and subsequent wastewater discharge. The absence of tin facilitatesrecycling of the steel, and the laminated polyester film reportedly discharges no toxic fumes when burned offfor recycling. The process is more profitable and consumes less space, steel, water and energy than theconventional method.

In Japan, a longer range economic perspective is taken than in the United States, with firms being morepatient about investing for expected longer term payoff. An example is the Fuji Xerox plant visited (see FujiXerox site report), which integrates a product take-back and disassembly unit within an assembly facility.The disassembled components are cleaned, inspected and reassembled into new products. While theassembly plant is profitable overall, the disassembly unit is still not cost-effective compared with the optionof using all new components. However, Fuji Xerox continues improving its efficiency in anticipation offuture regulations, expecting to realize a competitive advantage by being first to achieve cost-effectivedisassembly and reuse.


Limitations

While anecdotal evidence of “win-win” situations is inspiring, there is a great deal of controversy regardingthe impact of environmental controls on the overall profitability of the firm (Porter and van der Linde 1995;Portney 1998). Some assert that there is no tradeoff between pollution prevention and “the bottom line” forthe firm; that measures taken to prevent pollution also increase efficiency and profits (Hawken et al. 1999).Others argue that if EBM technologies always simultaneously decreased cost and improved product quality,the marketplace would have already achieved its “lowest polluting” potential without governmentintervention. They point out that although initial efforts to reduce pollution very often result in some savingsfor the firm, there often comes a point where increasingly stringent regulations incur unavoidable costincreases. (However, noncompliance might result in an even more significant cost increase.)

Interestingly, few (if any) companies have yet quantified the link between environmental assessments andbusiness/economic assessments. Even companies that take a pro-active stance by going beyond merecompliance present the economic assessment mostly on a case-by-case, anecdotal basis and notsystematically. Some promising initial research has determined that firms that adopt a single stringent globalenvironmental standard, regardless of local standards, have higher market values (Dowell et al. 2000). Thesetypes of analyses are in their infancy, and rely heavily on self-reported assessments of general managerialpractices. More in-depth analysis of the correlation between specific technologies and their economic impactis needed.

Collaboration Between Stakeholders

Current Status

The most striking distinguishing feature of the European approach is the way in which environmentalprotection legislation is formulated. Regulators, citizens, academia, industry and consultants interact in amore cooperative, less adversarial manner than in the United States.

In Europe, the Dutch are often cited as having the best cooperation between industry and government,followed by the Scandinavians. As can be seen in the TU Delft site report, in 1989 a shift occurred in theDutch Ministry of Housing and Spatial Planning (the equivalent of the U.S. Environmental ProtectionAgency) when it shifted from the classical media (air, water, land) based approach to an industry-sector-based approach. Furthermore, the Ministry of Economic Affairs began to cooperate directly with the Ministryof Housing and Spatial Planning. The result is that, in governmental policy decisions, the correlation betweeneconomic and environmental issues is much better understood and managed

Limitations

Some limitations to this approach are details regarding implementation (which can be easily overcome) whileothers may be more intractable. Lucent Technologies (see TU Delft site report) emphasized the crucial roleof a trusting and long-term relationship with suppliers. Cooperation with other partners in the supply chain iscritical. Furthermore, a comprehensive strategy must be pursued, such as developing a set of recommendedalternatives rather than simply “black-listing” certain materials.

Two more serious limitations to employing this approach in the United States are the traditionally adversarialrelationship between government regulators and industry, and the litigious nature of our society. Whilemanaging a cooperative interaction in a small country with a rather homogeneous population is admittedlymuch easier than doing so in a country as large and diverse as the United States, there is much to be gainedfrom improving collaborations between U.S. stakeholders.

Symbiotic Thinking and Industrial Ecology

Current Status

Several companies clearly have evolved beyond “business as usual” and can be viewed as “thinking outsidethe box.” At Interface Flooring Systems, the approach is centered on “quantification, qualification,


symbiosis.” This means that once a waste stream’s amounts have been defined (quantification) and theirseverity assessed (qualification), an attempt is made not just to reduce it, but to find an outlet that canactually use the waste as a feedstock. These outlets can be other industries, and a symbiotic industrialecosystem (as promoted by industrial ecology) can be obtained.

However, this symbiotic approach can also take place more directly with nature. Interface Flooring is usingnatural materials for some of its carpet products, e.g., animal hair and, recently, corn based fibers. Similarly,DaimlerChrysler is using natural reinforcing fibers (flax or sisal, depending on location) instead of glassfibers in some of its polymer composite components because these natural fibers can be more easilydecomposed, both when recycling production scrap and also at the end of the useful life of the vehicle.

Limitations

This paradigm shift of viewing groups of industries, and even nature, as a large interconnected system doespose some problems. Both Interface and DaimlerChrysler noted that an entirely new supply chain had to besetup. For example, DaimlerChrysler had to ensure consistent crop quality, which even meant redesigningfarming equipment and developing quality control systems to deal with unavoidable variations in the naturalfiber “manufacturing” process, such as the influence of the amount of rainfall on fiber strength. Anotherexample is efforts by Archer Daniels Midland in identifying a use for waste fly ash (similar to cement)generated by its fluidized bed coal combustion system. The fluidized bed system successfully decreases airpollution, but the chemical composition of the waste fly ash depends in turn on the composition of the coal,which varies greatly. As a result, the fly ash is unsuitable for many applications. In essence, the samemanufacturing process quality control systems that have only recently been embraced by individualmanufacturers will need to be embraced on a much larger scale.

Paradigm Shift from Selling a Product to Selling a Service

Current Status

The technical and economic difficulties with recycling described above can be avoided though product reuseand component remanufacturing (at least temporarily). Component reuse is well established in a number ofsectors (e.g., automotive components, manufacturing equipment) and is pursued primarily when it makesgood business sense. Most remanufacturing is performed by third-party remanufacturers, with a fewexceptions. Caterpillar, Xerox, Kodak and Dell actively pursue remanufacturing and reuse as part of theirbusiness strategy. All three major U.S. automobile manufacturers offer numerous remanufactured parts,including complete engines, through their dealer networks. There is a substantial aftermarket business inremanufactured parts as well.

Caterpillar’s “Reman” offers remanufactured engines and engine components at prices below that ofcomparable new components. Engine blocks are first disassembled, flushed and inspected, then resurfaced.Crankshafts are reground, polished and checked. Bearings, seals, gaskets, etc., are replaced with newcomponents.

Dell's “remanufactured” computers are those that have been returned by the consumer within the 30 day totalguarantee period. These computers are disassembled, rebuilt to original specifications and then tested. Dell'sremanufactured systems cost $100-$600 less than comparable new models, and come with the samewarranty. However, they do not allow for modification of predetermined system configurations. Dell doesnot currently offer a standard leasing option, but it does offer to dispose of end-of-use systems for businessconsumers.

In Europe and the U.S., such reuse and remanufacturing have long been part of the replacement partsbusiness. In the U.S. remanufacturered automotive parts are a $36 billion per year industry. However,European OEMs appear to be more directly involved in remanufacturing—for example, at DaimlerChrysler’sEuropean engine remanufacturing facility, whereas in the U.S. most remanufacturing is done by third partyor independent firms, although sometimes under OEM contract and distribution. The next logical step wouldbe to improve the cost-effectiveness of disassembly and remanufacturing technologies.


In addition, there is growing interest in a paradigm shift from selling a product to selling a service. In such anarrangement, the customer essentially leases the product for a predetermined time period, or perhaps pays amonthly fee for the defined service. The Dutch government has sponsored several studies to determine how ashift toward selling services would promote sustainable development. Japanese electronics companies use thephrase “inverse manufacturing” to refer to this concept, and are exploring concepts involving modularconsumer electronics systems, where one module (such as a monitor) might serve the function currentlyfulfilled by two or more consumer products (such as a television and personal computer).

Such leasing arrangements have been in place for automobiles and copying machines for some time. For themanufacturer, advantages of this approach include far greater control over the condition and timing of theproducts’ return to the manufacturer. For example, the Fuji Xerox system described above includes a systemfor keeping maintenance, repair and reliability records for each product, which is considered at the time ofdisassembly.

Limitations

There is an untapped potential for “design for component reuse.” The panel observed few examples ofproduct components being designed specifically for easy disassembly so that certain components that can becost-effectively cleaned, remanufactured and re-assembled into “new” products. One important example ofthis is internal combustion engines, which in the past could be relatively easily disassembled and serviced,but were not necessarily designed with remanufacturing in mind. Caterpillar, on the other hand, hasdeveloped a newer design strategy that does specifically look forward to the remanufacturing process, e.g.,through use of piston bore sleeves in its engines that are designed to be removable, hence eliminating theneed for bore machining in the remanufacturing process.

As for the service paradigm, it is not yet clear how customers will respond to this new approach. So far,leasing arrangements have been successful for high-cost, high-maintenance products such as photocopyingmachines. It remains to be seen whether customers will be satisfied with merely renting other types ofproducts where “pride of ownership” is an important attribute.

SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS FROM SYSTEMS VIEWPOINT

One of the major findings of the panel is that a systems approach to EBM is essential. Our findings indicateseveral opportunities for specific advances in systems analysis that would facilitate EBM.

Overall Modeling and Information Needs

The most pressing needs from the systems perspective are fundamental data, and modeling of the jointtechnical, economic and environmental impacts of product and manufacturing process design. Table 4.2shows a matrix of information for modeling needs. Each column refers to the set of engineering design andmanufacturing decisions throughout the life cycle. Each column category contains many separate decisions.For example, “manufacturing” might include material forming processes, chemical processes, temperatures,line speeds, type of solvents employed, etc. Each row indicates the resulting impacts and objectives, such ascost, quality and environmental impact. Again, each row category might contain many separate impacts, suchas capital investment costs, labor costs, taxes, etc. Each element within the table indicates the cause andeffect relationship between the engineering decisions and each impact. As one moves from the upper leftcorner of the table to the lower left, the general trend is that the availability of information and analyticmodels decreases. Manufacturers currently employ relatively good models and data for cost estimation as afunction of material choice and manufacturing process. More recently, quality estimation and control modelshave been developed.


Table 4.2Modeling and Information Needs

Engineering Design and Manufacturing Decisions

Impacts andObjectives

Design andMaterials

Manufacturing Consumer Use Post Use

Cost √√√ √√ √√ ?

Quality √√ √ √ ??

Environment

solid waste √ ? ? ?

water ? ? ?? ??

air ? ?? ?? ???

In contrast, the lower right corner of Table 4.2 indicates that the life-cycle environmental impacts of manymanufacturing processes, consumer use patterns and post-use options are still very poorly understood. Evenwhen manufacturing processes are well understood, the environmental impacts might be closely tied withproprietary manufacturing processes. As a result, several companies, such as Volvo, have developedproprietary life-cycle analysis tools for in-house use. If pro-active environmental management does givefirms a marketplace advantage, that advantage is lost if they share data or new technology with theircompetitors. In the United States, a further concern is exposure to liability in the case of future litigation, ifthe manufacturer can be shown to have been aware of environmental impacts.

The second most pressing need is standardization of life-cycle analysis. Even when the environmentalimpacts of a particular manufacturing process can be estimated from commercially available or proprietarysoftware, the results are quite complex. In order to convert the myriad impacts of air emissions, wastewaterdischarge and solid waste disposal, many subjective tradeoff judgements must be made. Further judgementsmust be made to define temporal boundary conditions; how far back in the supply chain and how far forwardin time should impacts be considered? The final, and perhaps most intractable, problem is judging theappropriate tradeoffs between the environment, cost and quality.

Other modeling and information needs include education and regulatory system analysis. Education(curriculum development) is needed for both engineers and non-technical majors, to enable understanding ofenvironmental complexities. In regards to regulatory systems, much more information is needed to determinethe set of regulatory approaches that maximize the economic incentive for EBM.

Technology Needs

The most critical technology need from a systems viewpoint is integration of standardized life-cycle analysesinto computer aids to product and manufacturing process design. Several attempts at such tools exist, butthey are most often “add-ons” that are employed by a specialized environmental group, or by the engineer ina time-consuming iterative fashion.

The significant data requirements for such an effort are often cited as a major stumbling block. As mentionedabove, another difficult and contentious aspect is comparing or “weighting” environmental impacts thataccrue to different media (air, water, solid waste) and occur at different points in time, affecting differentstakeholders. These impacts are referred to by economists as “externalities,” or impacts suffered by partiesother than the decision maker. Many environmental protection regulations seek to “internalize theexternalities,” and manufacturers lack a standardized toolkit for their analysis. As a result, manufacturersdevelop and/or utilize a wide variety of tools, which results in a duplication of effort and/or questionableassumptions.


Business Needs

One key finding was the close interrelationship between environmental protection and the business aspects ofproduct design and manufacturing. The most pressing need is to adopt a business paradigm whenconsidering EBM technologies, rather than citing anecdotal evidence that “pollution prevention pays” or thatit doesn’t. A business paradigm would include developing a strategic long-range plan for expending capital,incurring operating expenses, measuring effects and reaping profits.

In addition to the information needs described above, marketing data related to “green consumerism” isneeded. While many companies highlight their concern for the environment in advertising campaigns, fewappear to possess quantitative information that would enable them to more effectively target these marketsegments. Many companies appear to be satisfied with the “halo effect” of their green products on sales of alltheir products, such as that of hybrid electric vehicles on overall fleet sales. Information about the size of themarket is needed, along with information about customers’ willingness to pay in terms of cost, performanceor convenience for environmentally superior products.

A related need is for development of consumer product labeling to convey environmental information to theconsumer. Many argue that such labeling would be much more complex than nutrition information labelingsince there is no environmental equivalent to nutrition requirements, environmental impacts are externalities,and there is currently no method for comparing environmental impacts over the entire product life cycle in away that consumers could understand.

Summary

In summary, three key elements were identified as systems needs:

• Fundamental data that support standardized life-cycle environmental analyses

• Technology that fully integrates life-cycle analyses directly into computer aids to product andmanufacturing process design

• Business models which more accurately predict the economic implications of environmentally benignmanufacturing

REFERENCES

Bras, B. 1997. Incorporating Environmental Issues in Product Realization. United Nations Industry and Environment.Vol. 20, No.1-2, p. 7-13.

UN “Brundtland” Commission. 1987. Our Common Future, Report of the World Commission on Environment andDevelopment. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Cramer, J. and A. Stevels. 1997. “Strategic environmental product planning within Phillips Sounds and Vision,”Environmental Quality Management. Autumn..

Dowell, G., S. Hart and B. Yeung. 2000. “Do corporate global environmental standards create or destroy market value?,”Management Science, Vol. 46, No. 8.

Hawken, P., A. Lovins and L. H. Lovins. 1999. Natural Capitalism: Creating the Next Industrial Revolution, RockyMountain Institute.

Khanna, M. and W. Quimio. 1999. “Corporate environmentalism: Regulatory and market-based Incentives,” WorkingPaper Series #19, Environmental and Resource Economics, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

Palmer, K., W.E. Oates, and P.R. Portney. 1995. “Tightening environmental standards: The benefit-cost or the no-costparadigm?” Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 9, No. 4, Fall.

Porter, M. and C. van der Linde. 1995. “Toward a new conception of the environment competitiveness relationship,”Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 9, No. 4, Fall.

Portney, P.R. 1998. “Counting the cost: The growing role of economics in environmental decisionmaking,”Environment, March.


Wasik, J. 1996. Green Marketing and Management A Global Perspective, Blackwell Publishers, Inc., Cambridge,Massachusetts.

Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary. 1974. Merriam Company, Springfield, Massachusetts.

43

CHAPTER 5

MATERIALS & PRODUCTS

Timothy Gutowski, Cynthia F. Murphy, Tom Piwonka, and John Sutherland

METALS AND METAL MANUFACTURING (T. PIWONKA)

Summary

Much of the concern over the environmental burden of manufacturing processes is focused on traditionalmethods of producing metal and metal parts. Traditional metal manufacturing involves mining andbeneficiation, casting, machining, forging and surface protection (painting and coating), which traditionallyhave been less than benign. There have been substantial improvements made to these processes to amelioratetheir impact on the environment, and research is continuing to decrease their environmental load. Theseefforts are driven by a variety of pressures, but all are focused on more efficient use of metals, alloys, andenergy, as well as the total costs of production.

Introduction

To most people, “manufacturing” means heavy manufacturing, represented by integrated steel mills,foundries and automobile plants. Thus the term “environmentally benign manufacturing” soundsoxymoronic, since such plants are regarded as dirty, noisy, hot, dangerous, smelly, and inherently polluting.However, the panel found that significant progress has been made in metal manufacturing processes toreduce the environmental burden of metal processing, and there is active and creative research going on toproduce further improvements. Opportunities for further research were also identified.

The three major contributors to environmental problems from metal manufacturing are machining (lubricantaerosols and metal dust in the air and water, as well as chips, turnings and machining waste), casting(effluents from mold binder decomposition, spent sand solid waste) and surface protection (paint vapors).Complicating the problem is that most firms that specialize in these manufacturing techniques are small andmedium sized enterprises (SMEs), whose small size constrains the assets that they can devote to thedevelopment of environmentally benign manufacturing methods. There is a clear need to support these firmsin the development of technology to lessen the burden their processing methods place on the environment.

The panel noted that in many countries sustainable development, which includes the implementation ofenvironmentally benign manufacturing technologies, is considered to be the mutual responsibility of theentire society, including industry, government and the communities in which the industrial plants are located.A recurring theme from industrial personnel in Japan and Europe was their dismay at the adversarial positionof the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) towards U.S. industry. While federal and statelegislation and regulations often require an adversarial relationship, it is appropriate to question whether sucha posture is truly beneficial for environmental improvement. In other countries governmental environmentalagencies are seen as facilitating clean manufacturing techniques by working cooperatively with companiesand communities to develop and implement environmentally benign manufacturing technology.

5. Materials & Products44

Primary Metal Production

Primary metal production is the separation of metal from its ore. Most ores are oxides or sulfides of themetal, and the metal winning process consists of reacting the ores with other compounds that combinepreferentially with the oxygen or sulfur in the ore. For example, iron ores are compounds of iron andoxygen. In conventional steel production, the ore is first reacted with carbon in the form of coke in a blastfurnace. The product, pig iron, contains little oxygen, but does contain about 4.5% carbon. Since the carbonlevel in steel is much less (0.01 to 2%), it is necessary to remove the carbon from the iron to convert the ironinto steel. This is done by reacting the molten iron with oxygen in an oxygen converter. The reaction ofoxygen and carbon is exothermic: it gives off energy, heating the molten bath of metal. It also producescarbon dioxide, CO2, a greenhouse gas.

An alternative method of separating a metal from its ore is by electrochemical means: the ore is dissolved ina solution and a current is passed through the solution. Metal ions flow to one electrode, plating out on it.The electrode is then removed from the solution and the metal is processed. For example, aluminum ores aredissolved in molten cryolite to which fluoride salts have been added to produce aluminum cathodes forfurther processing. Electrical consumption requirements are large, and carbon dioxide is emitted at thecarbon anodes used in the process.

The Role of Carbon in Metals Production

Winning metal from ores requires energy to melt the ores and fluxes (solid materials added to controlchemical reactions or the physical form of the waste products from the furnace, such as slag), and to keep themetal molten. The energy can be chemical (produced by heat liberated during an exothermic reaction) orelectrical, and is often a combination of both. Since most energy in the world is generated as a result ofcombustion processes, and a large percentage of ores, especially iron, are reduced with carbon, theproduction of primary metals yields large amounts of greenhouse gases, primarily carbon dioxide.

Carbon for metallurgical reactions is usually produced in the form of coke. Coke is coal that has been heatedin an oven from which oxygen is excluded. During heating volatile gases in the coal are driven off. Thesegases are either burned or collected and used as feedstocks for other organic chemicals.

Alternative forms of carbon may be used, including recycled organic products such as thermosetting plastics.This allows the thermochemical energy of the plastics to be recovered, and is preferable to landfill disposal.Thermosetting plastics are more attractive for this application than thermoplastics, as thermoplastics can berecycled by melting, while thermosetting plastics decompose instead of melting when exposed to heat.However, many thermosetting plastics contain elements in addition to hydrocarbons, such as fluorinecompounds added as flame retardants or chlorine compounds added to give strength. These compounds areoften pollutants or are corrosive to metallurgical plants when they are burned. Burning the compounds yieldscarbon dioxide; Japan has currently banned the burning of plastics, unless they are being recycled for theirchemical values (i.e., as necessary reactants in a chemical reaction) to avoid the creation of unnecessarygreenhouse gases. At Nippon Steel, we learned that Japanese steel companies have been burning plastics asalternatives to coke (Japan has only one active coal mine, and thus must import nearly all its metallurgicalcoke). The steel industry in Japan is therefore at pains to emphasize to the public that carbon must react withiron oxide to produce steel, and the formation of carbon dioxide is an unavoidable consequence of this.

Aluminum

Because of the light weight of aluminum compared to steel, aluminum production is expected to growsubstantially in the near future. Much of this growth will come from the use of aluminum in automobiles, notonly in engine and chassis components, but as body panels as well. Audi has introduced an all-aluminum carin production, and is expected to be followed by other manufacturers. (There is, however, a price penaltyassociated with the use of aluminum, and the steel and cast iron industries are investing in programs to maketheir products competitive in weight and performance in automotive applications.)

Timothy Gutowski, Cynthia F. Murphy, Tom Piwonka, and John Sutherland 45

The U.S. aluminum industry has been designated an “Industry of the Future” by the U.S. Department ofEnergy (as have the steel, mining, glass, forest products, foundry, forging and other basic industries).2 Underthis program, cooperative research and development agreements are written with industrial consortia to carryout research focused on improvements in energy usage and reduction of environmental pollutants. Theconsortia combine industry, government laboratories and academic institutions; at least half of the fundingmust be generated by industry. The Industries of the Future program requires that industry develop aroadmap through the year 2020. The aluminum industry roadmap targets a goal of eliminating CO2

emissions by 2020, and decreasing energy use to 13 kWh/kg by 2010 and 11 kWh/kg by 2020. Another goalof the aluminum industry worldwide is to reduce the production of perfluorocarbons, a family of greenhousegases generated in the aluminum production process.

Production of aluminum is highly dependent on inexpensive electrical power, which is why aluminum plantsare found concentrated in the United States in the Tennessee Valley and the Pacific Northwest, where waterpower is available. The aluminum industry in the United States formed the Voluntary Aluminum IndustrialPartnership (VAIP) in 1995 with 12 of the 13 primary aluminum producers and 94% of U.S. productioncapacity represented. The object of VAIP is to reduce energy consumption, perfluorocarbon emissions, andgreenhouse gas generation by the industry. The goal is to reduce perfluorocarbon emissions 40% by the endof 2000; by 1997 they had already achieved a 41% reduction.

In Europe, Corus Holland (Hoogovens Steel) has installed equipment to capture 98% of the airborneparticulates emitted in primary production, and has also opened a plant to remelt scrap aluminum forsecondary ingot production. Remelting of aluminum to secondary ingot consumes only 5% of the energyrequired for primary ingot production. Indeed, this is one reason that aluminum beverage cans areeconomical in the U.S.; voluntary recycling of used cans is so high in the U.S. that some can scrap is divertedto other industries. (The reason for this is different alloys are used in the can bodies and tops, as the topsmust be strong enough to support an opening mechanism. The alloy used in the top, in the quantitiesgenerated in can recycling, eventually alters the composition of the body alloy so that it cannot be used, thuslimiting the number of cans that can be recycled into bodies.)

Recycling of aluminum alloys into secondary ingot will increase over the next decade as the aluminumcontent of automobiles increases. However, recycling must be done with care, as the three or four mostpopular alloys must be accurately identified in the recycling process to avoid contaminating each otherduring remelting. A further concern in recycling these alloys is that after a number of recycles, traceelements increase in the aluminum to levels such that the properties of the recycled alloy are degraded andthe alloy can no longer be used. Research is needed to develop economical methods of removing these traceelements in the production of secondary ingot.

Steelmaking

The manufacture of steel has traditionally been carried out in large integrated steel mills, where iron ore,coke and limestone enter the plant, and finished steel mill shapes (bar, rod, billet and sheet) leave the plant,along with the waste stream of slag, wastewater and greenhouse gases. In the last twenty years, however, arevolution in steelmaking has taken place: mini-mills, which melt primarily scrap and focus on only one ortwo mill products, have taken over much of the steel production in the United States. Mini-mills generallyuse electric arc furnaces (EAFs) instead of blast furnaces and oxygen converters to produce their steel.Integrated mills still dominate in much of the world, especially in countries with emerging economies, wherethey are seen as emblematic of industrial strength.

While mini-mills have less intense environmental impact than integrated mills, their dependence on scrap asa primary charge material can exhaust the supply of quality scrap needed for their product. Indeed, the entirequestion of recycling steel is confounded by two problems:

2 More information on the “Industries of the Future Program” at the U.S. Department of Energy can be found atwww.oit.doe.gov.


• Steel oxidizes (rusts) easily. Thus steel must be protected in service with some kind of coating. Thecoating must be removed prior to or during remelting. As stronger steels are developed, thinner sections(less weight) can be used, as their performance equals that of thicker, weaker steels. However, thepercentage of the scrap represented by the protective coating increases, decreasing the yield of therecycling process.

• Many alloying elements cannot be removed easily from steel once they have been added. These includetin and copper, which is commonly found in automotive scrap, although it has recently been reported(Materials Progress 2000) that the addition of aluminum to the bath neutralizes their effect. Otheralloying elements (such as nickel and molybdenum) deliberately added to specialty steels are alsodifficult to remove.

In 1997 the European Union published a report (Roederer and Goutsoyannis 1997) that reviewed the then-current (1996) situation in Europe on environmental problems/accomplishments of steelmakers. The reporthighlighted problems in common methods of data gathering in different European countries, and concludedthat most European steelmakers were attempting to use BAT (best available technology) to mitigate theenvironmental effects of their process.

One section of the report dealt with research and development projects that would improve the steelmakers’ability to operate in an environmentally benign manner. Among the suggestions were the following:

• Better methods of particulate filtration

• Removal of zinc and lead dust from blast furnace, EAF and sinter plants

• Treatment of scale, sludges and grinding dust for recycling

• Continuous methods of monitoring wastewater discharge

• Oil extraction from wastewater and from grinding dust and scales

• Better sensors for air emissions

• Theoretical understanding of the thermodynamics of hazardous waste gas generation

The steelmakers we interviewed are not enthusiastic about the concept of life-cycle assessments. Althoughsome steelmakers will provide input data to customers for them, they are aware that steel is heavier thanaluminum or magnesium and this usually extracts a life-cycle cost and energy penalty during the use phase.This is especially true for transportation equipment where energy consumption and pollutant and greenhousegas generation during the use of the product far exceed what is used and generated in manufacturing.

Direct Reduction Iron. The steel industry today is increasingly using methane (CH4) rather than pure carbonto reduce iron ore. The process conserves energy, as it takes place in the solid state rather than the liquidstate, and eliminates one of the greenhouse gas reactions, as well as using a greenhouse gas, methane, as areactant. The process produces small spheres of nearly pure iron, known as “direct reduction iron” or DRI; ifthe spheres are briquetted into larger pieces (measuring 5” x 3” x 2”), they are known as “hot briquette iron,”or HBI. DRI is primarily used in electric arc furnaces. EAFs were designed to operate on solid charges ofsteel, generally scrap. DRI, which consists of pure iron with a small amount of residual oxide, is an attractiveaddition to the charge mix of EAFs.

When DRI is used as feed metal in EAF production of primary steel, CO2 generation is cut 25 to 35% overbasic oxygen furnaces, and a similar amount when it is substituted for pig iron in electric furnaces. When itis used to produce steel in mini-mills that combine it with scrap, CO2 generation is cut nearly 90%. However,the need to minimize power costs and shorten heat times makes it economically attractive to deliberately addcarbon to the bath, and then remove it with oxygen, to get the benefit of the exothermic (heat producing)reaction between carbon and oxygen. The reaction produces carbon dioxide gas as a by-product. Projectionsare that future furnace designs will move towards a hybrid EAF/basic oxygen furnace to accelerate the steelmaking process while decreasing the use of electrical energy.

Integrated Steel Mills. Integrated mills must conform to environmental regulations in each of the countries inwhich they are located. However, at the present time, each country has a different approach to theestablishment of environmental regulations, and each country has different environmental priorities.


For instance, the Dutch steel and aluminum producer Hoogovens has recently merged with British Steel toform Corus. In Holland the elimination of NOx is of high priority, so Hoogovens has developed a NOxscrubber for its operations. However, in Great Britain, NOx is not as important, so there is less interest onthe part of the British part of the new company in the technology.

In both Japan and Holland, emphasis is placed on developing environmental technologies that improve thelocal conditions around the plant. In Japan plant environmental personnel work closely with localgovernments to satisfy the neighbors and keep the local environment acceptable. In Holland, Corus Hollandreported that it sponsored university research into ways of eliminating the odor in order to meet localconcerns over the odor given off by the company’s slag granulation plants.

In a large integrated mill there is sufficient solid waste to justify installation of a sinter plant to recover theiron values. The charge into the plant contains baghouse dust, sweepings, etc., that contain iron mixed withother materials. One advantage to sintering the solid waste in one operation is that all effluents areconcentrated in one source that can be treated before being released to the atmosphere. Other attempts torecover metal from steel plant wastes include a Japanese government research effort to recover zinc fromEAF baghouses.

Steelmakers attempt to recover as much material and energy as possible. In integrated steel plants in theUnited States, the energy recovered from burning flue gases is generally used on-site or the gas is “flared,” orburned off. At Corus Holland’s steel plant the excess energy generated is sold to a nearby power plant; thesteel plant receives a credit against its electric bill. In Japan, Nippon Steel is attempting to improve heatrecovery from warm (150–200°C) heat sources such as water and air.

Chaparral Steel’s Midlothian (Texas) plant, which includes a steel mini-mill, an automobile shreddingfacility, a cement plant and an electric power plant, is a highly successful example of material exchangesbetween facilities. Slag from the steel mill is ground into small aggregate and sent to the cement plant. Hereit is fed directly into the kiln, where it reduces the need for some endothermic reactions, reduces the need forlime (CaO) derived from calcium carbonate (a greenhouse gas producing reaction), and reduces thegeneration of solid waste. (For more detail, see the site report on Chaparral in Appendix E.)

Other Primary Metal Production

The need to develop environmentally benign ore beneficiation methods is less urgent in developed countriestoday than a century ago, as most mines in North America and Europe have been worked to their economiclimit. As a result, most active mines are located in third world countries, where there is less emphasis onenvironmental and energy concerns. Nevertheless, there is a need to develop ore treatment procedures thatare more environmentally friendly.

At the National Institute for Resources and Environment in Japan, a “soft metallurgy” project is in progressto develop methods for recovery of copper from CuFeS2, methods that do not create sulfur dioxide gas orslag.

Metal Shaping (Net-shape Manufacturing, Casting, Forging, Dry Machining, etc.)

As part of environmentally benign manufacturing, it is necessary to reduce the amount of materials andenergy used, as well as the number of components used to make an assembled product. The concept of “net-shape” manufacturing thus becomes essential to environmentally benign manufacturing (EBM).

Research into net-shape manufacturing began in the Department of Defense in the 1970s. The emphasis wasinitially on machine tools and machining operations, leading to the development of numerically controlledand computer numerically controlled tools. (Ironically, although the development work was carried out inthe United States, today most machine tools are imported from Japan or Europe.) Research efforts were alsofunded to improve the dimensional capabilities of near-net-shape technologies such as precision forging(which led to the development of creep-forging), powder metallurgy, and investment casting. However,dimensional control and as-produced surface finish of castings and forgings is generally not good enough to


allow a significant reduction in machining operations. Research into net-shape manufacturing techniques iscurrently not a priority.

There is a tendency to regard “precision engineering and manufacturing” as the science of making tinycomponents. Indeed, at least two laboratories the panel visited in Japan clearly indicated that such was theirinterpretation. There does not appear to a widespread acceptance of the definition of precision engineering as“the capability to control dimensions to plus or minus one part in 104 or 105.” Thus machining of castings andforgings continues, although a European machine tool executive expressed the opinion that machining addedvery little value to a product. Nevertheless, it is accepted in metalforming operations that combining theoriginal manufacturing method (such as forging or casting) with final machining operations is essential formaximum profitability. It would appear that a major effort to develop highly accurate and precise methodsof making large cast and/or forged components (such as those that are found in internal combustion engines)to net-shape would significantly reduce the environmental impact of metal manufacturing on theenvironment. Reaching such a goal depends on combining the disciplines of design and manufacturing, atrend we noticed in a number of industries (especially automotive) worldwide.

Many metal shaping concerns are small and medium size enterprises (SMEs) that are first or second tiersuppliers, who sell to other manufacturers, not to the public. A growing trend worldwide is for the largecustomers of these suppliers to insist that the suppliers operate state-of-the-art green manufacturing plants.In the words of the panelists’ hosts at international truck manufacturer Volvo, “We are world class, and weexpect our suppliers to be world class also.”

One disturbing trend was noted in the United States. Large manufacturers, such as automobile companies,are increasingly divesting themselves of their metal manufacturing operations. When asked, representativesof one company explained that such moves allowed the manufacturing to be done by specialists in the area(such as casting, forging, or machining). However, most suppliers are much smaller than their customers,and they have fewer resources to devote to address environmental problems created by their manufacturingprocesses. Their environmental departments emphasize compliance, not development. This suggests a needfor a national initiative to address the environmental problems faced by these smaller companies as theyattempt to meet their customers’ demands for lower costs in an environmentally responsible manner.

Casting

At DaimlerChrysler (Germany), casting was described as the manufacturing process of the future, becausecomponents could be combined in castings, thus eliminating machining and assembly operations. Forcasting to reach its full potential, however, dimensional control and reproducibility must be substantiallyimproved. The foundry industry in the United States has realized this and is sponsoring a number ofbenchmarking studies to determine current casting dimensional capabilities.

Sand foundries comprise about half of the metalcasting establishments in the United States. These foundriesmake the molds (into which the molten metal is poured) from sand, held together with a mixture of clay andwater. In ferrous foundries finely divided bituminous coal is added to the mixture to improve the surfacefinish of the casting. Cores, which make the hollow parts of castings, are made of sand bound withthermosetting resins. When molten metal is poured into the mold, the thermal decomposition products fromthe coal and resins are released into the atmosphere. These decomposition products include greenhousegases and other gases that are listed in the EPA’s list of hazardous air pollutants. The foundry industry isactively pursuing binders and mold additives to reduce effluents from the mold. One promising approach isthe addition of oxidizing agents to the mold to more completely combust the decomposition products.Current research shows that the addition of these products not only cleans the air, but also reduces theamount of clay needed to bond the sand.

To help develop more environmentally benign metalcasting technology, the Department of Defense and themetalcasting industry have built a modern sand foundry to study low emission products and processes ingreen sand foundries. The $50 million facility, called the Casting Emissions Reduction Program (CERP)facility, at the closed McClellan Air Force Base in Sacramento, CA, permits the measurement of air qualityat various stages in the production process. It is currently being used to carry out a number of researchprojects that call for dedicated foundry production of a shift’s worth of castings. The projects include both


environmental and dimensional studies that would otherwise disrupt production in a commercial foundry.This is a unique facility that is not found in other countries. CERP’s Cooperative Research and DevelopmentAgreement (CRADA) is being transferred from the Air Force to the Army’s National Defense Center forEnvironmental Excellence, and CERP is becoming a private company. It is seeking support from andcollaborations with industry and government agencies.

Non-ferrous casting methods have recently been expanded to include semi-solid casting methods, in whichan alloy is heated to a temperature between its liquidus and eutectic temperatures and then injected into asteel die. Both aluminum and magnesium alloys are made this way. Dimensional control is excellent, andcastings often need no machining to be used. There have also been substantial improvements in the qualityof pressure die castings in recent years. This net-shape process is now capable of producing dimensionallyaccurate parts with high property reliability. The success of semi-solid casting methods for non-ferrousalloys suggests that more efforts should be made to extend this method to ferrous metals and alloys. Theinitial attempts to develop ferrous die casting 25 years ago were commercially unsuccessful; it may be timeto revisit this technology.

Foundries are often the recycling method of last resort. Large manufacturers such as DaimlerChryslerbriquette oily turnings, grinding swarf and other metal wastes into charge materials for foundries. In Europe,high zinc ferrous scrap is sold to iron foundries for the manufacture of low tensile strength gray iron.

Machining, Forming, Joining and Coating Processes

Machining. Machining operations are ubiquitous in materials manufacturing. The coolants and lubricantsused in machining generate water pollution and air quality problems, and can contaminate scrap used in re-melting. As a result there is a major effort worldwide to develop methods of reducing or eliminating coolantsin machining processes. It is generally conceded that complete elimination of lubricants is unlikely, althoughit is feasible to reduce their use substantially. Techniques include improved thermal management of theworkpiece and chips, and focused application of the coolant on the tool/workpiece face. Another approach isto add a polymer that resists shear to the cutting fluid, thus substantially reducing the formation of the smalldroplets and aerosols that cause environmental and health concerns in machining operations.

A further problem is chip removal: in the absence of coolant flow, chips tend to accumulate on the machineways. The opinion was expressed both in Europe and Japan that the fundamental solution is the developmentof net-shape forging, casting and powder processing techniques so that subsequent machining is unnecessary.EX-CELL-O has a demonstration project using dry machining in a transfer line in Cologne, Germany, andFraunhofer IGB in Stuttgart has developed a closed loop system for monitoring and replenishing coolantsduring cutting.

Dry (or almost dry) machining is a major research emphasis in Japan and in Europe. In the United States, wewere told by all three automobile manufacturers that developing dry machining is an environmental priorityfor their companies.

Another approach is to eliminate machining wherever possible. For instance, at Volvo, holes in the truckchassis are punched instead of drilled. This is done to facilitate recovery of the metal removed, as punchingsare easier to re-melt than turnings. The punchings are sold to Volvo’s supplier foundry.

Metal Forming and Forging. The Saitama plant of Toyo Seikan (a steel beverage can manufacturer in Japan)is a good example of a factory developed to minimize its effect on the environment. The entire plant wasdesigned to minimize use of energy and materials, and uses a stretch draw and ironing process with nolubricant to produce a steel can only 0.18 mm thick at the bottom. The key technology is the use of steelsheet laminated with 20 micron polyester on both sides. The polyester, needed to prevent corrosion, also aidsin the drawing process. A further improvement is redesign of the can geometry to thin the wall even more.The total can making process consumes only about a fourth of the energy of a standard can making process.

The forging industry in the United States has identified a number of areas where research can lead to a moreenvironmentally benign manufacturing process. These are identified in its Forging Industry Roadmap, partof the Department of Energy’s Industries of the Future program. Among the environmental needs identified


are the development of baseline data on energy and environmental usage and impact (in other words, a life-cycle assessment), development of environmentally safe lubricants for forging, and better ways to managethermal energy in forge plants. Better die materials and better ways of protecting dies from oxidation werealso identified as research needs.

Joining. Joining processes represent an interesting problem in environmentally benign manufacturing: ifproducts are joined too well (as in welding) they cannot be disassembled for repair, or reuse. Hence thedecision to join two components permanently must be approached with care. Mechanical joining usuallyrequires that surfaces be carefully machined to obtain satisfactory fits. Adhesives may be used, but care mustbe taken that they do not degrade in the application environment.

A new joining process for aluminum is currently under study that may prove useful in marine applicationsand other large aluminum assemblies. Developed in Great Britain and known as “friction stir welding” it is asolid state joining method in which two sheets of aluminum are placed adjacent to each other. A solid rod isthen rotated into the joint between them, heating them by friction, and stirring the metal together. The metalis not melted, thus preventing those defects such as porosity and inclusions that form during solidification,less energy is used, and no filler metal is necessary. The process is currently under study in a number ofcountries to optimize its use and operating parameters.

Other joining methods that are under development include laser welding, which is currently used for highprecision welding, but suffers from low energy efficiency. Nevertheless, Audi introduced laser welding forits A2 aluminum-body mass production car in the summer of 2000. Each car has 30 m of laser welding onthe body.

Coating. Surface protection of metal, which includes coating and plating, is a major contributor toenvironmental problems. Plating operations were an early target of state and federal environmentalenforcement agencies. To a large extent, the plating industry is no longer considered to be a major polluter.However, painting is now being recognized as a major environmental problem.

The primary problem in painting has been the use of organic solvents as the vehicle for the pigments. Thesesolvents require extensive treatment of the exhaust air from the painting operations before the air can bereleased to the atmosphere. Although there are methods that clean the solvents from the air, they requireextensive use of fans, filters and other treatment equipment. The systems are expensive to build, andexpensive to operate. (One European OEM installed such a system, only to discover that changing thecoating method from solvent to water base would have accomplished the same goal at a fraction of the cost.)Water base systems have been developed, but they also present problems, both in the product quality and intreatment of effluent.

One technology that has been “almost” developed is the coating of steel sheet in the steel mill. The coatingsare sufficiently pliable that the sheet can be stamped using conventional stamping dies. But stampingcompanies are reluctant to use the process. They are concerned about scratches on the surface as a result ofhandling problems during stamping, edge cracking of the coating during trimming, and color match fromcoating batch to batch. Nevertheless, the application of the clear coat in automobile and appliance factoriescould be done using this method, if methods were developed to eliminate these concerns.

Surface protection and preparation is key to obtaining long life in metallic (and especially ferrous)components. In view of the environmental problems involved with coating systems and applications, theneed for increased research into surface protection methods should be clear.

Alloy Development

Lightweight Alloys and Composites

Increasing metallurgical knowledge is showing that impurities and trace elements can substantially degradealloy properties. Sulfur has been identified as a deleterious element in a number of alloys, and oxygen levelsare being controlled in ferrous alloys. Most alloy development today is focused on eliminating thoseelements that reduce alloy properties.


Composite materials are attractive because it is possible to combine material properties in ways not found innature. For instance, a strong but easily oxidized fiber such as graphite can be encased in a corrosionresistant matrix such as aluminum. Although these materials have been extensively studied in the last fourdecades, their acceptance has lagged. (It is significant, however, that current advanced military andcommercial airframes are making use of a number of resin-matrix composites for control surfaces andstructural members.) Composites are attractive because they often permit a lightweight structure to have highstiffness and tailored properties for specific applications, thus saving weight and reducing energy needs.

Composites are, however, expensive to fabricate and inspect. In addition, they present serious problems inrecycling, as it may be impossible to separate the reinforcing material from the matrix. Metal-matrixcomposites can also have a performance limitation: the moduli of the matrix and the reinforcing phases areusually different, leading to the possibility of fatigue failures at the interfaces between them unless they arecarefully designed. A further problem, shared by all newly developed materials, is that extensive mechanicaland environmental testing, under static and dynamic conditions, is required before designers will use thematerial. Thus alloy design efforts, once a mainstay of primary metal producers, have become much lessimportant, and efforts are focused instead on the use of existing alloys. This trend is a barrier to theintroduction of new and useful material systems. It was also important that evaluation of the recyclability ofa new material be included in the material database.

Acceptance by designers of new material systems based on lightweight intermetallics has for the most partbeen disappointing. Titanium aluminides have seen some applications, but acceptance of other intermetallicsystems has lagged: they are hard to fabricate, and frequently have properties that are little better thanexisting alloys. Magnesium alloys, once popular in the automobile and aircraft industry (but suffering fromsevere corrosion from salt in the atmosphere near seacoasts, or applied to de-ice roadways) are making acomeback, and a number of research initiatives exist in the United States and Europe to improve theirprocessing, especially casting.

Concern was expressed by a number of companies that highly engineered tailored materials (such as gradedpowder metallurgy tool steels where the composition varies over small areas) cannot be recycled withoutlosing their structure. Other recent areas of materials technology emphasis, such as nano-materials, presentsimilar problems: because the alloying elements are so finely dispersed in the alloy, it is not currentlypossible to recover these alloying elements during recycling.

Iron, Steel and High Strength Alloys

In view of the importance of achieving light weight in all applications that use energy during their life cycle(such as cars and trucks), iron and steel face a challenge. Although iron and steel are stronger and stiffer thanaluminum and magnesium, they are not attractive if they result in a weight and energy usage penalty to thefinal product. Thus there are a number of research projects aimed at making them lighter.

In the United States, a consortium of iron foundries and their suppliers is sponsoring research on theproduction of “thin-wall” iron, that is, iron castings having wall thicknesses down to 3 mm. Research isneeded because if the proper melting and pouring procedures are not followed, cast irons solidify with a hard,brittle structure in thin sections, which is not useful in engineering applications. The research also focuses onthe molding technology required to control wall thickness.

Research into very high strength steels is going on in a number of organizations worldwide. In Japan,researchers at the National Research Institute for Metals are developing high strength steels, supported byJapanese steel companies. One project is investigating thermo-mechanical treatment of low-alloy steels toobtain micron-sized grains to yield steels with strengths in the 800 MPa range. Similar studies are underwayin European and U.S. laboratories. Another project is to develop martensitic steels with 1500 MPa strengthsby removing hydrogen and coarse carbides from grain boundaries. Among the problems posed are those ofjoining the material without altering its microstructure. Some possible solutions include the use of extremelynarrow gap arc-welding techniques, one-pass laser welding, and low temperature joining techniques.

In Japan the importance of diminishing the effect of corrosion on steel is recognized as a major need. Oneproject seeks to develop steels that do not require chrome plating. Another project aims to develop


corrosion-resistant steels for marine application that contain reduced amounts of chromium, nickel andmolybdenum. The approach being taken is to produce ultra-pure steels, alloyed with nitrogen and melted in acold-crucible levitation melting furnace.

One interesting approach in alloy development that was suggested to the panel is to limit the systemsinvestigated to those containing elements that can be easily recycled. It remains to be seen whether suchsystems will have economic value.

Implications of Take-back Laws on Materials Design

Current legislation in Europe requires manufacturers to take back their products at the end of their useful life,known as “Extended Producer Responsibility” laws (Williams et al. 2000). For automobiles, this will beginin 2006. In practice, this may encourage manufacturers to lease the product to the consumer for its usefullife, as no provision is made in product price for the cost to the manufacturer for take-back. In effect, themanufacturer would sell “use” instead of “product.” The lease price for a new item would be higher than theprice for an older item, and when the item could no longer be leased, it would revert to the manufacturer,which would be responsible for recycling or remanufacturing the materials it contained. This is notrevolutionary: most office equipment is leased, and very high percentages of other products, such asautomobiles and golf carts are also leased. Even commercial aircraft are often leased. However, the conceptis not popular with European automobile manufacturers.

The implications of take-back laws bear consideration. In the case of automobiles, the average car lasts for12–13 years in the United States, and has traveled about 110,000 miles when it is scrapped. From thestandpoint of the metals industry, this means that scrap that met the specifications of the industry 13 yearspreviously must be accommodated in the recycling procedure. Another implication of the changing materialcomposition of the automobile is that conventional scrap markets, based primarily on ferrous materials, willbe faced with dislocations over the next two decades. There are implications for the entire infrastructure ofscrap collection, sorting and distribution, if metal recycling becomes the responsibility of the originalequipment manufacturer, instead of the scrap yard. The current efforts of Ford to acquire expertise indismantling (see the Ford site report in Appendix E), and the support of DaimlerChrysler (Germany) for aGerman program in dismantling automobiles, is evidence of concern for this issue.

This may imply that alloy compositions would have to be frozen, as development of a new alloy for anengine block may leave the manufacturer with large quantities of the old engine block material—and nomarket for it—at some point in the future. Modern alloys are made to more stringent specifications thanthose used previously, even when the alloy designation does not change. Also, as noted above, most alloyscan only be recycled a few times before they have dissolved unacceptable levels of impurities. (Each time analloy is melted it dissolves minute quantities of the crucible or mold material; eventually these add up and thealloy no longer conforms to specification.)

This could possibly lead to more robust design of components, so that they could be remanufactured and re-installed in rebuilt assemblies. However, the need to use older components might inhibit innovation indesign. Also, the use of more robust designs may add weight to the final product, requiring increased energyusage in its life cycle. Thus the possibility of take-back laws appears to complicate the picture for metals andalloys.

Summary

Metal manufacturers have always been intensely interested in recycling and reduction in the use of energyand materials. As material requirements become more stringent, and pressures increase to minimize energyusage and greenhouse gases, the metal manufacturing industry continues to look for improved manufacturingmethods. Today there is an emphasis on the use of new, lighter weight materials instead of traditionalferrous materials. There are implications for the scrap/recycle stream that need to be considered, as well asimplications in material development. These implications include alloy and part processing, logistics ofscrap collection, sorting and shipment, and methods of recovering advanced materials either in their originalform, or in separating the individual metal values from the material.


It is important to understand that component design often defines the manufacturing method that is used.Thus environmentally benign manufacturing begins with an understanding of design for environmentallybenign manufacturing. This concept needs to be recognized in university design and manufacturing courses.

Research needs include:

• Methods of removing contaminants and trace elements from recycled alloys

• Methods of economically recovering and reprocessing composite materials

• Development of true net-shape metal casting and forging methods

• Methods of recycling and recovering alloying elements in highly engineered materials

• Evaluation of the recyclability of new materials and new material systems

In terms of priorities, it was pointed out by a number of companies that the three largest contributors topollution in metal manufacturing are machining (the use of lubricants), casting (air pollution from binders)and surface conditioning (cleaning, painting and plating). Focusing developmental work in these areaswould have the greatest impact on facilitating environmentally benign metal manufacturing.

POLYMERS (T. GUTOWSKI)

Summary

Polymers have a poor environmental image in large part due to their contribution to litter and landfills. Butmajor environmental impacts also occur early in their life cycle in the petroleum and chemical industries andduring processing, where they contribute to volatile organic compounds, hazardous air pollutants, waste,wastewater, and energy related impacts. In contrast, polymers often save energy and associated carbonemissions during their use phase by supplying light-weight components in transportation applications andinsulating properties for thermal applications. Here we review major trends for polymers through all phasesof their life cycle. The singular unmet challenge of polymers, however, is the development of sustainableend-of-life scenarios. Approaches for end-of-life scenarios include reuse, recycling, incineration for energy,by-product synergies, and the development of biomaterials.

Introduction

United States polymer production continues to grow and is now on the same order as metals. For example,primary plastics, rubbers, cellulose fibers, paints and adhesives now total about $71 billion in shipments,while steel, aluminum, copper, and non-ferrous metals total about $73 billion. However, over the last tenyears the plastics segment has been growing at three times the rate of the metals (Darnay 1998). When theextended polymer industry3 is considered, the value of shipments is enormous, exceeding $274 billion in1996, a 55% increase since 1991 (SPI 1997). Similar trends exist worldwide where the total volume ofplastics produced exceeds that of metals and is expanding at a rate faster than the rate of expansion of theeconomy (McCrum et al. 1997). Primary production and consumption of polymers is centered in the UnitedStates/North America, Europe and Japan (SPI 1997; Modern Plastics 2000).

This success is due to the low cost, light weight and excellent properties of polymers for such applications asfood containers, packaging materials, textiles, films and engineered parts. In spite of their ever expandinguse, however, polymers retain an image of being environmentally unfriendly. The potential environmentalimpacts associated with the different life-cycle phases of polymer products are listed in Table 5.1.

In Table 5.1 several reccurring themes are noted. At various stages in their life, polymers exist as lowmolecular weight hydrocarbons, and various hydrocarbon solvents are often employed in their processing.Consequently, there is always a threat for leaks or spills to occur, or for the escape of volatile organic

3Primary producers, product manufacturers, machinery companies, mold makers, wholesale distributors and plasticsprocessors


compounds (VOCs) and hazardous air pollutants (HAPs). Furthermore, in the case of some polymers, theprecursor chemicals, the intermediates, or the catalysts can be quite hazardous. In fact the chemical industry,which produces the polymers, has historically been one of the leading toxic waste sources in the UnitedStates (EPA 1998).

Table 5.1Some Potential Environmental Problems with Polymers

Phase Problem

Petroleum extraction,refining,

Leaks, spills, releases, solvents, energy, HAPs, VOCs, waste and wastewater, use ofnon-renewable, limited resource

Primary conversion Toxic materials, energy usage, HAPs, VOCs, wastes and wastewater

Processing VOCs, HAPs, energy, hazardous materials, wastes and wastewater

Use Out-gassing, unreacted monomer, release of residual solvents, plasticizer, etc.,degradation and failure of the product, energy usage, interaction with environmentalliquids, acids, foods, etc.

End-of-life Solid hazard, litter, leaching, hazardous release during incineration, landfill shortage,unsustainable

A second important theme for polymers is energy usage. Polymer processing uses significant amounts ofenergy. For example, if the entire plastics industry experienced only a 1% improvement in processefficiency, enough energy would be saved to power over one million homes a year (Mattus 1997).

Finally, the common end-of-life scenarios for polymers are not sustainable. Of primary concern is theavailability of petroleum feedstock, which is estimated to be at or near its historic peak and predicted to be indecline within the near future (Smil 1998). In addition, the current demands for energy resources and freshwater appear to be increasing at an unsustainable rate. Landfill space is also rapidly disappearing. In factmany countries, and some states in the United States, no longer have landfill as an option. While theimmediate solution, particularly in the EU and Japan, is incineration, there are increasing efforts to identifymore sustainable life-cycle scenarios for polymers. In response, governments and industry are exploring (a)reduction in use, (b) reuse, and (c) recycling of materials, as well as conservation of energy and energyproduction by non-carbon means.

Primary Polymer Conversion

Polymers are made up of long chain molecules with repeating units, mostly of hydrogen and carbon. Theirproduction starts with small molecular units, monomers, which are usually gases or liquids derived frompetroleum feedstocks, and catalysts, often metallic compounds, needed to initiate and control the reaction, aswell as other ingredients. These reactions almost always require heating, cooling, striping, separation, andwashing of the polymer product. The principal environmental impacts of this process are energy use,production of VOCs and HAPs, wastewater, and solid waste. For example, in the production of polystyreneby suspension polymerization, about 12.5 kg of wastewater is used for every kg of product (Nemerow 1995).The energy requirement to make polystyrene is on the order of 96 to 140 MJ/kg. For comparison purposesthe energy requirement to make carbon steel is on the order of 50 to 60 MJ/kg, or only about one half. Notethat on a per volume basis, however, the energy required for carbon steel is about four times that ofpolystyrene, due to the large difference in density between the two materials (Ashby 1992).

Most polymers are produced by a few very large companies in the chemical industry. The primaryprocessing of polymers is usually carried out in large integrated facilities in order to capture by-products andto obtain economies of scale. The chemical industry produces on the order of 300 million tons of product,with sales of over $250 billion each year, therefore, it is a significant component of the U.S. economy and ithas consistently contributed to U.S. exports. At the same time, however, it produces on the order of 1.5billion tons of hazardous waste (leading all other manufacturing sectors) and 9 billion tons of non-hazardouswaste each year. That is, it produces about 5 kg of hazardous waste for every kg of product, and it producesabout 30 kg of non-hazardous waste for every kg of product. It leads all other manufacturing sectors in air


emissions, and because it is also very energy intensive (using primarily fossil fuels) it is a major contributorto carbon emissions (Allen 1995). As a consequence, the chemical industry is subject to a range ofenvironmental regulations, including the Clean Air Act (CAA), the Toxic Substance Control Act (TSCA),and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), and has been the target of environmental groups.In fact, several of the companies in this industry may be best known to the public because of environmentaldisasters attached to their names.

In response to this situation, the chemical industry spends billions of dollars annually on pollution preventionand control, and has hundreds of billions of dollars invested in pollution control equipment. These measureshave resulted in significant reduction in pollution and waste over the past decade. However, the utility ofcontinuing this “end-of-pipe” treatment approach may now be reaching a point of diminishing returns. Itappears that new approaches are necessary to address the staggering problem posed by the chemical industry.Recent studies have outlined new strategies based on “clean technologies” to improve the chemical industry(Allen 1995; Klee 1992). The basic clean technologies strategies to reduce wastes and usage of materials ofconcern include (1) waste recovery and materials exchanges, (2) waste reduction, including equipmentredesign for more efficient processing, and (3) materials substitution.

Waste Recovery and Materials Exchanges

In many cases, the wastes and emissions from chemical and petroleum operations can be captured and sold orused as fuel. For example, in a recent vapor recovery project Conoco recovered $210,000/year worth of ventgas as on-site fuel and 3,633 barrels/year of saleable condensate resulting in less than a two-year payback forthe initial investment. Furthermore, pollution reductions were significant: 884 tons/year of NOx, 2,366tons/year of VOCs, and 495 tons/year of HAPs (Sharfman 1999). In another example of waste exchanges,DuPont found a market for hexamethyleneimine, a by-product of nylon manufacturing, that was previously awaste. The market for this new waste/product continued to grow and in 1989 demand exceeded supply(Allen 1995).

Waste Reduction

A recent comprehensive study by Amoco showed waste reduction at the source to be far superior to optionslike treatment and disposal (“end-of-pipe”). These cleaner technologies resulted in reducing the costs tohandle pollutants by a factor of 5:1 (Klee 1992). These waste reducing, cleaner technologies are often builtupon a better understanding of the underlying physical phenomena involved, which can then be translatedinto better process modeling, equipment design, and process control. Particular attention is focused onvessels, pumps, piping and valves, reactors, heat exchangers and separation technologies (Allen 1995; AIChE1998).

Materials Substitution

In addition, much can be gained by materials substitution to alter feedstocks, reaction pathways, and by-products. One area where considerable leverage may be available is catalysis. Catalysts exert strong controlover the quality and quantity of the polymer product and wastes. For example, early production ofpolypropylene always resulted in 7-10% of waste non-linear material (for example a total of 200 x 106 lbs. ofwaste in 1980). Process research led to a new catalyst that reduced this waste by 90% (DOE 1991).Furthermore, some catalysts that are left in the polymer can be potentially hazardous, especially at the end-of-life when they can leach out of landfills or contribute to toxicity if incinerated. Solutions for theseproblems require research into more benign catalysts.

Many other materials substitutions are also possible, including alternative solvents, new raw materialssources, and completely new reaction pathways. One area of particularly intense activity is in the productionof polymers from biomass. This route could produce both sustainable and biodegradable materials (andbecause of its importance is addressed further later in this chapter). In general, both the biggest payoffs andthe biggest risks lie in this area of new materials substitution. The risks are big because the implications aresystem wide, requiring reconsideration of many parts of the production process and, in some cases, the entireintegrated plant and supply chain.


Polymer Processing

Polymer processing is concerned with the conversion of polymer resins into parts. Resins are generallyclassified as either thermoplastics or thermosets. In general, thermoplastics come as solid pellets or sheetsand are softened or melted by heating during the process and solidified by cooling. These materials can bereheated and reformed and can be recycled by this means. Thermosetting materials, on the other hand,usually come in low molecular weight flowable material forms such as liquids or partially cured “pastes” andare solidified by a chemical reaction. Hence they cannot be remelted. The chemical reaction to form thethermosets is initiated by some external energy source, usually heat, or by mixing the reactants just prior tomolding. Composites processing is an extension of polymer processing where the resins, usually thermosets,are mixed with fibers, such as carbon or glass, and molded and cured into final parts. The majorenvironmental impacts associated with polymer processing fall into four categories: (1) energy usage, (2)waste, especially from thermosets, (3) wastewater, and (4) VOCs and HAPs from the polymers and/or fromprocessing aids or additives such as solvents and blowing agents.

Examples of thermoplastics are PE and PET that are used extensively in automobile interiors, and ABS, PCand HIPS which are used in computer components such as housings. Examples of thermosetting polymersare polyurethanes and polyesters that are used in automobile exterior panels and glass/epoxy composites thatare used for printed circuit boards.

An example of an important process that is used extensively for thermoplastics processing and in a modifiedform for thermoset processing is injection molding. A schematic of thermoplastic injection molding isshown in Figure 5.1. Solid pellets are loaded into the hopper and are melted as they move along the extrusionbarrel. The melt is then forced into a closed cavity mold under high-pressure. For high-volume productionthe mold is likely to be water-cooled and to use a hot runner system.

Fig. 5.1. Schematic of injection molding (Mattus 1997).

The injection-molded part then solidifies by cooling and is automatically ejected from the tool. Typicalinjection molding cycles are quite short, on the order of tens of seconds. Injection molding can produce pre-colored, highly complex parts to net-shape. In many cases there are no secondary operations required priorto use of the part. In other cases, cleaning, painting or coating and assembly with other components may berequired before the product is ready.

The environmental impacts associated with injection molding are related to energy usage, which is primarilyassociated with melting, pumping and clamping, wastewater from cooling, and out-gassing of volatiles whichfor thermoplastics is usually small. In-process scrap is usually reground and recycled when a cold runnersystem is used. Hot runner systems reduce, and in many cases eliminate, the need to recycle the cold runnerand save the energy associated with molding and then regrinding and recycling the cold runner. Secondaryoperation can lead to environmental impacts associated with cleaning and painting, but most parts aredesigned to eliminate secondary operations.

The processing of thermoset materials is similar to that of thermoplastics, but generally requires the handlingof only partially reacted or unreacted polymeric materials at a very low molecular weight. Hence, thepotential for out-gassing of unreacted monomer as well as residual solvents and other low molecular weightspecies during processing is very high. This leads to the escape of various volatile organic compounds(VOCs) or hazardous air pollutants (HAPs). For some industries, such as boat building, the management ofvapors and fumes from the resin is a major environmental issue. In fact, recent interest in a variety of closed


mold and enclosed molding techniques such as RTM (resin transfer molding), resin film infusion, SCRIMP(Seemann Composite Resin Infusion Molding Process) and VARTM (vacuum-assisted resin transfermolding) is due in large part because of their ability to manage fumes and out-gassing from thermosetprocesses. While thermoplastics can also out-gas, especially when subject to high temperatures, the amountof the VOCs released from thermoplastics tends to be significantly less compared to thermosets.Nevertheless, some of the thermoplastic materials do have the potential, particularly if subjected to thermaldegradation during the processing, to release extremely harmful materials. A particular case in point is PVC,which can react at high temperatures with the atmosphere to produce hydrochloric acid (HCl).

Many of the environmental issues associated with polymer processing are related to the additives used toenhance processing characteristics or to improve the physical and chemical properties of the part, or both.Some of these are quite specific to a particular industry. For example the elimination of brominated flameretardants is a major issue in the electronics industry (see the electronics section of this chapter). Likewise,the transition from solvent based paints to water based paints is a major issue for the automotive industry (seethe automotive section this chapter).

The entire range of additives, however, is enormous. The Modern Plastics Encyclopedia lists 13 differentcategories. These include; antiblocking agents, antimicrobials, antioxidants, antistats, blowing agents, carbonblacks and other fillers, colorants, flame retardants, heat stabilizers, light stabilizers, lubricants, organicperoxides, and plasticizers. Many of these can affect the environment by releasing undesirable by-productsduring processing, while the product is in use, or at the end of life. On the other hand, these additives canprovide real benefits, too, even to the environment. For example, blowing agents allow us to foam plasticand thereby conserve material, reduce weight and improve insulation properties. All of these could improvethe environment. However, in order to work properly during processing they also need to diffuse rapidly intothe polymer and decompose during processing to allow the foaming action to occur. Unfortunately, many ofthe materials that do this also adversely affect the environment. For example, the original blowing agentsused with polyurethanes used CFC-11, and while excellent blowing agents, they were chlorinated and as suchcontributed to ozone depletion. These have now been largely replaced by various alternatives, usuallyhydrocarbons—for example cyclopentane. While these are an improvement, the resulting foams are slightlydenser and there are still environmental issues associated with the hydrocarbons and cyclopentanes—VOCs.Hence, continued work in this area is necessary to develop truly benign blowing agents. One interestingfoaming alternative that can work with a variety of harmless gases is based on pre-saturation of the polymerprior to processing. Then, during processing, pressure can be released to allow the foaming action to occur.The resulting product is called “micocellular plastics” (Suh 2001).

Much attention to process innovation and new materials alternatives is focused on the elimination orreduction of solvent usage in polymer processing. For example, cleaning and painting operations can be bigsolvent users with many attendant environmental problems. Currently technology exists for rather effectivesolvent recapture (~ 90%), but in many cases it appears to be more effective to pursue alternative processingroutes and alternative chemistries. Many advances have been made recently in both washing and paintingtechnology. Completely satisfactory water based systems now exist to replace solvent washing and paintingin many cases. Examples exist in both automotive painting (see Volvo and Ford site reports), and inelectronics photo resists. Other interesting examples in this area include thermal vs. solvent based methodsfor wetting out fibers in the production of thermoplastic composites prepregs (Lutz 1999) and polymercoatings as a replacement for lubricants in steel can production (Toyo Seikan site visit).

New improvements to polymer processing technology require that attention be focused on a few key areas:(1) reduction of VOCs and HAPs, (2) improvements in energy efficiency, and (3) reduction in waste andwastewater. Significant environmental benefits for polymer processing may also be realized throughimproved process capability, which reduces scrap and waste. This can be achieved through processmonitoring and control (including equipment and material-use sensors), process modeling, and equipmentredesign for more energy efficient processing. Equipment redesign could include new heating and coolingtechniques, new tool designs (including hot runner systems) and new ideas made possible by rapid toolingtechnologies, substitution of electric clamping for hydraulic clamping, and efficient sizing of equipment for aparticular job.


Use Phase/Design

During product design, materials are chosen primarily based upon the requirements of the use phase and cost.While there are a number of potential environmental consequences of using polymers, as shown previouslyin Table 5.1, there is one recurring theme that presents a major challenge to the future development ofpolymers, composites and advanced materials of all types. This is the potential conflict between performanceand the ability to either incorporate recycled content into the material and/or recycle the engineered materialfor use in high value applications at the end of the original product’s life. Often, the very same feature thatappears to be responsible for good performance, the use of multiple materials in a symbiotic way, maypresent an enormous challenge in both of these areas. First, engineered materials are typically complicatedand use precise mixtures, making them intolerant to the variation that often comes with using recycledcontent. And secondly, because of their heterogeneous nature, these complex materials are either anenormous challenge to separate, or if not separated, they become a source of variation for most waste streamsto which they could contribute in their end-of-life. Hence the significant benefits to using engineeredpolymers and polymer composites in the use phase are often counterbalanced by a significant end-of-lifedilemma. Of considerable interest in this area are the new European directives for increased fuel economyand product take-back for automobiles. These dual directives are forcing this issue to be considered in depthby those who wish to compete in the European automobile market.

End-of-life Phase

One of the principal environmental dilemmas for a sustainable society is the end-of-life treatment forpolymers. While polymer usage continues to grow, economic end-of-life treatments for polymers continue tobe elusive. Nevertheless, the importance of the problem, particularly in societies that do not have additionallandfill space, has created pressure to try a variety of creative solutions. In fact, most of the observationsfrom the panel’s site visits with a focus on polymers were in the area of end-of-life treatment, and in the areaof “bio-materials” (covered in the next section) which are often developed precisely to solve end-of-lifeproblems.

To organize this problem, end-of-life options can be categorized as shown in the first column of Table 5.2.Opposite each of these are technology issues that need to be solved in order to enable the option. Note thatlandfill is the least technologically intensive solution, while recycle and reuse are the most intensive.

Table 5.2End-of-Life Options and Issues

End-of-Life Options Sortation &SeparationTechnology

InfrastructureRequirement

Materials &Additives

Design

Recycling X X X X

Reuse X X X X

By-product synergy X X X

Incineration X X X

Landfill X X

During our various site visits we found what appeared to be clear regional preferences for certain approaches.Many of the EU countries have, or are in the process of developing, extremely comprehensive collectionschemes for recycling. However, the end-of-life treatment for plastics appears to be incineration after it hasbeen separated from the more desirable metals and glass (MIREC site report). The panel also found thatcurrently Japan also incinerates most of its plastics. In the U.S. most plastic waste is landfilled. However, inareas of very high population densities, e.g., some east coast states, plastics incineration is now increasing.

The burning of commodity plastics for energy can be a good use of these petroleum based products becauseof their inherently high heating values. However, incineration does lead to carbon emissions and can releasetoxic materials to the atmosphere. In fact, a major issue in the EU concerning the disposal of plastics from


electronics is the potential toxicity of various flame retardants released during burning. For this reasonchlorinated flame retardants, which can produce dioxins, have been banned for some time. And currentefforts in the EU are focused on banning certain brominated flame retardants. Unfortunately, there is nocurrent alternative to, nor method to detect, the brominated flame retardants which help companies meet thefire safety codes in the U.S.. As a result, companies must use different resins for different markets andcannot mix them. This issue, which has curtailed recycling of some materials, is discussed in more detail inthe electronics section of this chapter.

In general, however, the panel did see some evidence of a move away from incineration and toward recyclingin both Japan, due to the new recycling laws that were scheduled to take effect there in April 2000, and in theEU, where automobile recycling laws will limit the amount of incineration. Furthermore, in the U.S. manylarge urban areas already have well-developed collection programs intended for recycling. Yet the financialsuccess of plastics recycling schemes to date has been very limited. The problem in most cases is related toinfrastructure development and the reverse logistics process. In simple terms, it is very hard to get anadequate waste stream in terms of volume and purity that can supply the needed material for a viable product.At the heart of this issue are some of the very attributes that make polymers so successful in the first place—low weight and low cost. Low weight actually increases reverse logistics transportation costs per unit ofplastics. And low cost means that transportation, cleaning and sorting must be very efficient in order to keepthe costs below those for the virgin material. Hence, the chance for successful plastics recycling increases asthe waste stream quality and quantity increase, and as the cost of the virgin material increases. Successstories to date are PET soda bottles and nylon carpet materials. Both are available in fairly large quantitiesthat can be separated efficiently. Furthermore, both can be recycled back to their original monomercomponents in a recycling scheme akin to metal recycling back to basic metals. There is also significantinterest in the development of recycling schemes for high-end engineering thermoplastics, which aretypically used in automobiles and electronic equipment. These include ABS, HIPS, and PC. TheEnvironmental Protection Agency and DOE are currently funding a “stakeholder dialogue” process at TuftsUniversity to examine the barriers to this technology. And there have also been several pilot studies to lookat infrastructure issues, including ones in San Jose, CA, Somerville, MA, and Binghamton, NY.

Clearly, new technology could turn around the plastics recycling problem, but the technology would have toaddress the fundamental systems issues. For example, one approach is to use shredding to densify the plasticfor efficient transportation, and then technology to sort it. This is the approach that MBA Polymers has taken(see MBA site report). MBA has developed new proprietary technology to solve the key part of thisscenario—the efficient sortation of mixed shredded plastics at high rates. Currently, MBA claims itstechnology can sort shredded plastics at the rate of 4 tons/hr. The panel also saw other sorting technologybased upon infrared reflection, but this method still cannot handle black plastics (see MITI Japan site report).One new plastics identification technology that can deal with black plastic and even identify some fillers andadditives is based upon Raman laser spectroscopy and developed by Spectra Code Inc. (IndustryWeek.com1998). The technique offers increased accuracy, but at lower rates and higher investment costs compared todensity sortation.

Yet another approach could be to reduce the transportation cost by the use of small scalable recycling unitsthat could be operated locally, presumably near a suitable waste stream. Small melt processing units mightwork under this scenario, but various depolymerization technologies, such as those used with PET and nylon,generally require large investments and hence much larger processing volumes, making them hard to scaledown.

While all of these schemes mentioned so far are for thermoplastics, work is being done on the recycling ofthermosets, too. While at NIRE in Japan, the panel saw a project on the recovery of phenol from bothphenolic and epoxy resins by liquid phase decomposition (see NIRE site report). This research is based onthe use of a hydrogen donating solvent such as tetralin and moderate temperatures (400°C) to recoverphenols from thermoset plastics. This route allows recovery of phenols at an efficiency of about 60 to 80%by weight directly from factory waste. This compares very favorably with current recovery scenarios basedon pyrolysis and supercritical water, which can only give efficiencies of about 20% due to the recombinationof radicals. Currently there is a small prototype facility built for this project that is being evaluated. Interestin this work has led to a joint research project with Sumitomo Bakelite, Hitachi Chemical, and JVC, whichwas scheduled to start in 2000. Work continues in the search for a tetralin substitute


In some cases, recycling infrastructures are set up to capture particular target materials because they areeither valuable or troublesome. For example, among thermoplastics, PVC usually requires special handlingbecause it can produce HCl during incineration, and it is a contaminant for some other plastics duringrecycling. While in Japan, the panel learned of a sophisticated infrastructure to collect and recycle PVC backinto pipe, and in another application into window frames (see Japan PCIA report). The significant features ofthe Japanese infrastructure are: (1) careful collection and sortation of construction waste by a licensedtechnician on site (paid for by the site owner); (2) reprocessing of the PVC to established standards; (3)financial support in terms of a subsidy provided by the government to allow the recycled material to competewith the virgin material; and (4) careful development of the application. For example, in the case of the PVCwindow frame, processing involved the development of a sophisticated three-material co-extrusion processwhich could produce a frame cross section with a PMMA exterior, virgin PVC interior, and recycled PVCcore. Furthermore, there is an excellent market for this window frame in the north of Japan where frames arepredominantly aluminum.

Such infrastructure developments could pay off by cleaning up feed streams for other plastics and bypreventing pollution from improper disposal of PVC. Furthermore, as volumes and efficiencies increase,these kinds of model efforts could become sustainable. Note that similar recycling schemes have beensupported in the EU to make three–layer PVC pipe. An equivalent PVC pipe enterprise in the U.S. does notexist due to shortcomings in our infrastructure (ARC 1997).

One major challenge to the U.S. is the treatment of plastics used in automobiles. Currently, the U.S. recyclesabout 10 million cars a year primarily for the steel, aluminum and other metals. The plastics end up as amixture, called ASR or “automobile shredder residue,” which currently goes to landfill. The opportunity totake advantage of this existing infrastructure appears to be significant, but to date no cost-effective solutionfor plastics has been demonstrated. Early attempts to disassemble large interior parts by plastic type from theautomobile prior to shredding have been found too costly. This approach could have yielded relatively pureplastics waste streams, but disassembly proved too labor intensive. In an alternative scheme, ASR wasflotation sorted to produce a power plant fuel source (Chaparral site report). However, this effort has beencomplicated by the presence of PCBs in the waste stream. Hence, even for incineration schemes, it is thedevelopment of a “clean” waste stream that is critically important for economic viability.

It appears that the key to success in this area is design for recycling. A first step would be to identify allmaterials in a product. And a second would be to design for their easy sortation. Clearly, the easiest productsto recycle would be those made of a single material, or simply separated from other materials that require nosecondary operations, like paint, label or surface coating removal and cleaning. Manufacturers are moving inthis direction by redesigning products to facilitate take-back. There are several examples of this approach inthe automobile industry. For example, both Ford and Toyota have designed new bumper systems from asingle polymer. Furthermore there is much interest in driving toward new automobile interiors based upon asingle polymer. Other examples come from the floor covering and carpeting industries. For example, newfloor covering systems are now designed such that the variety and amount of materials are reduced, and theinterfaces between layers are “zipable” to facilitate disassembly during recycle (see Interface site report).

Plastics can also be used in various by-product synergy schemes. For example, while in Japan the panellearned of projects to use plastics as a reducing agent in blast furnace steel production. In several pilotdemonstrations, plastics have been used as a carbon source in steel production to reduce the oxygen content.Furthermore, because of the higher hydrogen content of plastics compared to the typical reducing agent(coke), the Japanese have argued that some hydrogen reducing will take place, thereby reducing the carbonemissions during steel making (see NSC site report). These Japanese firms are using this scheme to helpmeet their Kyoto Protocol targets. On the other hand, this argument has been dismissed by managers at theDutch steel firm Hoogovens as marginal (see Hoogovens site report). Regardless, the use of plastics as areducing agent provides an intriguing end-of-life scenario for plastics and is being actively pursued in Japanand Germany (Pipes and Fahrbach 1999). In addition, we also heard of other by-product synergies, such asthe use of polymer composites in cement—both as filler and as fuel—and the use of glass fibers as a fluxingagent in the reclamation of metals from printed wire boards and after grinding a component of cement.Polymer and end-of-life treatments provide a rich opportunity for new technology and infrastructuredevelopment. Currently USCAR in cooperation with the APC is developing a “plastics in automobiles”roadmap (due out in the spring of 2000) which should provide additional guidance in this area.


Biomaterials

Many of the proposed solutions to a wide range of environmental issues for polymers involve thedevelopment of new materials. Certainly, one of the most intriguing areas of new materials development is inthe area of biomaterials. In many cases the goal is to grow the feedstock for a new class of biodegradablepolymers. For example, currently there are several commercial initiatives to develop biodegradable polymersfrom corn (IndustryWeek.com 2000). Two possible routes to do this include the processing of corn sugar topolylactide (PLA) and several routes to produce polyhydroxyalkanoate (PHA). In general, these productslook promising but raise a host of life-cycle issues that require closer scrutiny. These include (1) potentialland use conflicts, (2) net energy consumption, and (3) net greenhouse gas production (DuPont site report).For example, in a recent analysis it was found that the routes to PHA from corn generally require moreenergy than the conventional routes for equivalent polymers from petroleum (Gerngross and Slater 2000). Onthe other hand, PLA production appears to be energy competitive, but will lead to significant amounts ofgreenhouse gases. In any case one common element for all of these new materials scenarios is the need formajor new infrastructure. For example, when referring to the production of PHA, Gerngross and Slater write,“This processing infrastructure rivaled existing petrochemical plastic factories in magnitude and exceededthe size of the original corn mill.”

A related area is the growth of various fibrous plants such as sisal and flax to be used as reinforcements inpolymer composites. For example, currently door panels for new Mercedes Benz automobiles are made bythis route (see DaimlerChrysler-Stuttgart site report). For this project, DaimlerChrysler, with some (minor)support from the German government, developed the infrastructure to produce fibers of uniform properties inspite of variations in growing seasons. In this application, natural fibers would replace glass fibers thatpresent particularly challenging end-of-life problems. Natural fiber composites, for example, could be easilyincinerated for energy recovery, an option that is not currently available for glass fiber composites.Alternatively, they could be used with a biodegradable polymer matrix to make a biodegradable composite.The ultimate desirability of such an end-of-life scenario in countries with limited landfill space and forproducts that require durability requires further investigation.

Alternatively, synthesis with biodegradable linkages has also proven successful. For example, FraunhoferIGB in Stuttgart is looking into the synthesis of “natural” polymers by the inclusion of amine and ester bondsto promote biodegradability (see Fraunhofer IGB site report). Along this line it has produced an alternativefor cellulose called Ecoflex that shows good properties, but requires additional work to show economicfeasibility and to develop processing techniques.

Many of these proposed new biomaterials are intended to be used in packaging applications—a significantsource of polymer waste. One new packaging approach discovered by the panel comes from DuPont.Responding to the environmental concerns of customers, DuPont has developed new kinds ofenvironmentally friendly containers that can be processed in the identical manner as the contents of thecontainer. For example if the product is a compounding agent, after the entire contents are used, theremaining container can be crumpled up and put into the machine to be processed in an identical manner asthe compounding agent. Or, for the case of agricultural products, the potentially hazardous box liner wouldbe water soluble, just as the product, and could be deposited into the product applicator and sprayed onto theplants, just as the product was. This new kind of product container is called “Rotim,” which stands for“return or throw in machine.” Although not biodegradable, these materials are “process” degradable and mayrepresent a new, very efficient recycling paradigm for some types of products.

Summary

Polymers compete against other materials by virtue of their light weight and low cost. This can make themdesirable, and in fact environmentally friendly, during the “use phase” of the product. For example, the use ofpolymers and composites in automobiles has helped to lower weight and therefore lower fuel consumption.But these same attributes conspire to make recycling a difficult economic challenge. A lower materialdensity actually increases transportation costs per kg of material, and the low cost of virgin materials makesrecycling targets very difficult to meet. The primary problem is with the details of the reverse logistics stage,especially with streams that are extremely heterogeneous (mixed plastics) or dirty (contaminated with metaland paper). Major attention needs to be focused on the collection, transportation, cleaning and sorting of a


sufficiently pure waste stream to make plastics recycling economically viable. To accelerate recycling, newtechnologies can help; for example, small scale recycling technologies would lessen transportation andinfrastructure needs. New bulk-handling, cleaning and sorting techniques are also necessary.

And there is also the challenge of composites. These materials can provide enormous benefits at the usephase, but equally enormous challenges at the end-of-life phase. One possible route to recyclable compositescould involve organic and/or biodegradable fibers, other strategies could be based upon new materials withdesigned in “disassembly” schemes. Polymers and polymer composites can also be used in various materialsexchanges and as fuels. For example, there are pilot programs in Japan and Germany to use polymers as areducing agent in steel making.

The processing challenges for polymers are in some ways quite similar to metals, in that many of the benefitsshould be self-motivating for the processors. However, there is a need for new technologies that concentrateon energy efficiency and the reduction in volatile organics. These can include new efficient heating andcooling methods, new tooling, closed-loop control, and new materials and additives to reduce solvents,residual organics and materials of concern.

One particularly interesting area is that of the biopolymers and biomaterials. There is significant activityworldwide in such areas as biodegradable polymers synthesized from petroleum, organic fibers and fillers,and biodegradable polymers derived from various crops and biomass. While this work looks very interesting,the overall effect of these materials on the environment is still not well known. For example, a recent analysishas shown that some new routes from crops to biopolymers are actually more energy intensive than theconventional routes from petroleum. Much new work is needed to follow through the entire life cycle forthese materials.

Finally, the primary production of polymers from petroleum remains a serious challenge to the environment.These processes, contained in the petroleum and chemical industries, are subject to several initiatives tomove from end-of-pipe treatments to proactive “clean technologies” approaches. Several studies sponsoredby the EPA have shown the combined economic and environmental gains that can be obtained by thesemeans.

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES OF THE AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRY (J. SUTHERLAND)

Introduction

Automobile usage is increasing in the U.S. and elsewhere in the world. There were 700 million motorizedvehicles registered in the world in 1999, with the U.S. itself contributing over 200 million passenger cars andlight trucks (Alvord 2000). In the 1990s the number of cars worldwide grew three times faster than thehuman population (Pimental et al. 1998) and the number of U.S. cars increased six times faster than thepopulation from 1969 to 1995 (Alvord 2000). The situation in Europe is also of concern. For example, theCopenhagen-based European Environment Agency (EEA) stated in its recent report on the “State of theEuropean Environment” that transportation presents a huge threat to the environment as increases in freightand passenger vehicle use threaten climate change and air pollution goals. In fact, the EEA has stated thatmore efficient engines may not be enough to offset shifts towards larger cars, increases in car and air travel,and increases in distance driven per person (Burke 2000). While automobiles are presently too expensive formost people in developing nations, this situation may change with the increasing standard of living in suchnations as India and China. All these facts point to the importance of environmental issues as they relate tothe automotive industry.

The auto industry and its suppliers are aware of the ever increasing need to address environmental issues intheir products and processes. Many of the companies within the industry are very large global corporations(GM, Ford, DaimlerChrysler, and Toyota) that are well informed about technological, sociological, and legaltrends across the globe that are calling for improved environmental performance. As part of this WTEC studyon environmentally benign manufacturing (EBM), all of these referenced organizations were visited, as wellas several of their key Tier 1 suppliers and others in the vehicle industry. Every organization that was visitedhad some sort of environment-related company program/initiative, although these initiatives differed in their


scope and focus. Differences were evident across countries as well as within the supply chain. In fact, one ofthe biggest differences evident from this study was not the company-to-company differences, but thedifferences in public attitudes toward the environment from country to country. Since the public makes upthe work force of companies, the environmental awareness differs even within the same company as onemoves from one country to another. Given this background, this section presents a number of the ongoingenvironmental improvement efforts that are being undertaken by companies within the automotive industry.

One way of organizing the environmental issues of the automotive industry is to employ the life-cycle stagesof an automobile product. A typical life cycle is shown in Figure 5.2. In the figure, four principal stages arepresented: (1) materials processing, (2) manufacturing, (3) use, and (4) post-use. The materials processingand manufacturing stages are largely concerned with creation of a finished product. The use stage considersthe actual use of a product, in this case the operation of a vehicle. The post-use stage of the product includesboth product recovery as well as its subsequent disposition via reuse, remanufacturing, recycling, or disposal.

Fig. 5.2. Product life cycle.

Before examining the efforts around the globe that are directed at improving the environmental performanceof automotive products and processes, it is useful to examine the current status of the industry. Under theumbrella of USCAR (United States Council for Automotive Research—a cooperative, pre-competitiveorganization formed in 1992 by General Motors, Ford, and Chrysler) the United States Automotive MaterialsPartnership Life-Cycle Assessment Special Topics Group (USAMP/LCA) recently completed an LCI (life-cycle inventory) of a generic mid-size vehicle. Sullivan et al. (1998) report that the LCI team also includedrepresentation from the AA (Aluminum Association), AISI (American Iron and Steel Institute), and the APC(American Plastics Council). The LCI was performed on a generic 1995 mid-size vehicle (Chevrolet Lumina,Dodge Intrepid, and Ford Taurus). For each part within the vehicle, the material type and mass wereidentified. The generic vehicle had a mass of 1532 kg, used gasoline as a fuel source, had a fuel efficiency of23 mpg (city 20 and highway 29 mpg), and had a service life of 120,000 miles. For each stage in the life ofthe vehicle environmental data were collected—for example, energy usage, water consumption, airemissions, water emissions, solid wastes, and raw materials consumption. Key findings of the LCI include:

• The generic vehicle’s “use” phase dominates the vehicle’s energy consumption.

• The material production and manufacturing stages contribute 14 percent of the consumed energy, 65percent of the particulate emissions, 67 percent of the solid waste, and 94 percent of the metal waste towater.

• The end-of-life phase contributes eight percent of the total life-cycle solid waste, primarily asautomotive shredder residue (ASR).


While the WTEC EBM study is primarily concerned about the environmental issues surroundingmanufacturing processes/systems, it is nearly impossible to address the environmental concerns of theautomotive industry without at least a brief discussion of the product itself. As a result, each of the life-cyclestages will be addressed in the sections that follow. In addition, a section has been provided that addressesmore system oriented issues, e.g., supply chain challenges. Findings from the technical literature will bereported, as will information extracted from site visits in Japan, Europe, and the U.S. The section willconclude by identifying industry-wide trends and need areas.

Material Issues

Previous sections/chapters have focused on the environmental challenges associated with the processing ofaluminum, steel, polymer, and composite materials. This section concentrates on the role that materialselection plays in the environmental performance of automotive products. An automobile is a complexproduct that consists of a number of systems and material types. As part of the USAMP LCI activity,Sullivan et al. (1998) tabulated the material composition of a generic mid-size U.S. automobile. Figure 5.3displays the breakdown of the materials within the vehicle. As is evident, ferrous materials (cast iron andsteel) make up nearly two-thirds of the total vehicle weight. However, this fraction has reduced significantlyover the last several decades as lighter materials (aluminum and plastics) have begun to supplant the use offerrous materials.

Fig. 5.3. Material composition of a generic mid-size U.S. automobile (Sullivan et al. 1998).

In considering the selection of materials, Graedel and Allenby (1998) advocate the use of the followingguidelines for the design of industrial products:

• Select nontoxic and abundant materials

• Select natural materials (e.g., cellulose) rather than artificial substances (e.g., chlorinated aromatics)

• Select materials that are easy to recycle

• Minimize the variety of materials used in products and processes

• Acquire materials via a recycling stream

The automotive industry utilizes a tremendous amount of material resources; a summary of the amount ofvarious types of materials within an automobile are given in Table 5.3. The first of the guidelines indicatesthat materials should be used that are abundant, and since iron and aluminum are plentiful in nature, theysatisfy this criterion. Other listed metals are less common. Fluids (e.g., oil and transmission fluid) and rubberare petroleum derivatives and are therefore subject to the same scarcity as this limited natural resource. Thetable also lists the fraction of the total U.S. consumption that is used by the automotive industry. As isevident, the auto industry is the primary consumer of such materials as lead, platinum, and rubber.


Table 5.3Amount of Various Material Types Used in an Automobile and their Usage as a Percent of the Total

U.S. Consumption (adapted from Graedel and Allenby 1998)

Material 1950s Automobile(kg)

1990s Automobile(kg)

% of Total U.S.Consumption Used in

1990 Automobiles

Plastics 0 101 3.2

Aluminum 0 68 18.9

Copper 25 22 10.0

Lead 23 15 69.5

Zinc 25 10 23.0

Iron 220 207 34.5

Steel 1290 793 13.5

Platinum — 0.002 41.4

Rubber 85 61 62.9

Glass 54 38 —

Fluids 96 81 —

Other 83 38

Total 1901 1434

Table 5.3 indicates that the relative use of ferrous materials has dropped significantly since the 1950s. Thekey to understanding the motivation for reducing the use of ferrous materials in an automobile is the fact thatthe replacement materials have a lower mass density, and mass reduction is a proven method for obtainingimproved vehicle fuel economy. As an approximation, a 10 percent reduction in mass produces a 5 percentimprovement in fuel economy. In the U.S. over the last 25 years, as the automakers have responded togovernment-mandated CAFE (corporate average fuel economy) requirements, they have turned to lightermaterials such as aluminum and plastics. Magnesium, polymer composites, and ceramics are also beingfavorably viewed as automotive components. Graedel and Allenby (1998) suggest that the following materialtypes are expected to play increasingly important roles in the vehicle of tomorrow:

• Engineered plastics: Lower costs and improved material performance will result from advances inprocessing technology. The total quantity of plastics in the vehicle may double—essentially eliminatingnon-plastics in vehicle interiors.

− One of the organizations that was visited, Johnson Controls, is making effective use of recycled PETplastic in its headliner substrate.

• Composites: Organic and inorganic fibers that are woven together and impregnated with a plastic resincan be five times lighter than metals and provide competitive strength.

− In partnership with the German government, DaimlerChrysler is working to use natural fibers (sisaland flax) instead of glass fibers in fiber-reinforced plastic vehicle components. The challenges ofthis effort include the lack of an existing transportation infrastructure and the variation in fiberquality introduced by weather conditions, processing, drying, etc.

• Ceramics: These materials can be light and retain their hardness at high temperatures. Advances informulations and in processing techniques will allow these materials to find application as enginecomponents.

− As an example, DaimlerChrysler and its suppliers are working to develop a successful silicon nitrideceramic engine valve.


• Light metals: As noted, aluminum is already widely used in automotive applications. Magnesium usageis growing because its density is 25% of steel’s and 67% of aluminum’s. Factors limiting the widespreaduse of magnesium include its cost and availability, lack of suitable manufacturing technology orknowledge, and the susceptibility of the material to corrosion.

− To support its growing need for magnesium, Ford is investing in Australia’s magnesium miningindustry.

Of course, material selection guidelines suggest that toxic/hazardous materials should be avoided in productsand processes. Each U.S. automaker has developed a list of permissible materials that may be used by itsvendors. These specifications are aimed at minimizing the introduction of hazardous materials that increasethe regulatory burden of plants, result in the generation of hazardous waste requiring expensive management,or result in the release of chemicals that must be reported under the U.S. EPA’s Toxics Release Inventory(TRI). European-based companies likewise have established “black-lists,” materials that are to be avoided intheir products and processes, and “gray-lists,” materials that are to be avoided unless no viable substitutes areavailable. Japanese companies are also working with their suppliers to ensure that hazardous materials areavoided. Toyota’s 1999 Environmental Report notes that environmental purchasing guidelines have beendistributed to 450 parts and materials suppliers (in March 1999). These guidelines call for supplier ISO14001 certification by 2003 and control of substances of environmental concern.

The ease with which a material can be recycled is another guideline that should be considered when makingmaterial selection decisions. Steel and aluminum may be recycled relatively easily, although it has beensuggested that these materials may only undergo several recycling loops until contaminant levels are too highto produce acceptable microstructures without additional purification steps. The recycling loops associatedwith other metals, e.g., lead and copper, are also fairly well established. A by-product of the automotivemetal recovery recycling process, ASR (automotive shredder residue), is largely composed of contaminatedpolymer materials. At present, ASR is often landfilled in the U.S.; there are several examples where ASR hasbeen used as a fuel source. The bottom line, however, is that in the absence of regulatory interventionautomotive plastics are not being recycled to a great extent. Since it is envisioned that efforts to furtherreduce vehicle weight will result in an increased fraction of plastic and composite components, this mayhamper future recycling efforts. Reduced metal content may jeopardize the economic viability of the currentvehicle recycling infrastructure, thus endangering recovery rates of material resources at vehicle end-of-life.

Manufacturing Issues

A key stage in the life cycle of an automobile is the creation of the vehicle itself from engineering materials.An automobile may be broken down into the following subsystems: powertrain, suspension, HVAC,electrical, body, and interior. The production of components for these systems involves a wide range ofmanufacturing processes (e.g., casting, compression molding, machining, forming, adhesive joining, welding,coating, painting, injection molding, fiber/textile manufacturing, glass production, cleaning, and assembly).To place the manufacturing stage in the context of the life cycle for the whole vehicle, Sullivan et al. (1998)report the following:

• The material production and manufacturing stage constitutes 14% (about 140 GJ) of the total vehicle lifecycle energy demand of a generic vehicle. On its face, this suggests that manufacturing energyrequirements constitute a minor portion of the overall energy demand compared to the use portion of thelife cycle that consumes 84% of the energy. However, it must be noted that the energy consumed duringvehicle use is distributed over a 10-15 year period, while the manufacturing energy demand (andconcomitant CO2 production) occurs over a much smaller time period.

• 65% of the airborne particulates and 94% of the water-borne metals are generated during the materialproduction/manufacturing stage of the life cycle.

• 67% (about 2800 kg) of the solid waste is produced during the material production or manufacturinglife-cycle stage. Figure 5.4 shows the distribution of solid waste across three stages of the life cycle.


Fig. 5.4. Solid waste for three life-cycle stages for a generic mid-size U.S. automobile (Sullivan et al. 1998).

It should be reiterated that the energy/wastes associated with the manufacturing life-cycle stage tend to bemore temporally and spatially concentrated than the energy/wastes associated with the use stage.

There are significant differences in the energy efficiency and the relative quantity of waste produced acrossthe whole range of manufacturing processes. This EBM study revealed that there are also substantialdifferences in attitudes towards energy consumption and waste. These differing attitudes towards theenvironment were less a function of the company and more dependent on the sociopolitical climate of thesites that were visited:

• Industries in Japan are highly focused on the reduction of energy needs and CO2 emissions. This attitudeis perhaps motivated by the cost of meeting energy requirements through imports and the need to complywith the Kyoto Protocol. Solid waste reduction is also a priority. Again, this is principally motivated byspecific Japanese factors: the small area of the country and thus rapidly diminishing space for landfills.

− Japanese agricultural machinery manufacturer Kubota indicates that its ability to minimize wasteand utilize energy efficiently is a key to the company’s long-term economic competitiveness.

• In Europe, industry is very concerned about end-of-life products. This concern is prompted by the lackof available landfill space and the prominence of environmental political movements. Leadership interms of meeting ISO 14000 standards may also provide short term market protection for Europeanindustry.

• Attention by U.S. industry appears to be largely centered on compliance with government regulationsthat are principally directed at reducing/eliminating toxic discharges. The abundant supply ofinexpensive energy and landfill space (in most of the U.S.) provides little economic incentive forpursuing non-regulatory driven environmental initiatives.

− Several U.S. automakers have plants in Mexico that are zero wastewater producers. At theselocations where the water supply is limited, there is economic incentive to minimize water usage,and thus water discharges are recovered and recycled.

Based upon all the site visits and a review of the technical literature, environmental concerns have beenidentified for the following manufacturing processes:

• Casting

• Sheet metal working

• Glass manufacturing

• Painting/coating

• Plating

• Machining


• Joining

• Plastics processing

• Part washing

A brief discussion of the environmental challenges associated with each of these processes is describedbelow.

Casting

A previous section has addressed casting issues in greater detail, so this section is principally focused oncasting as it relates to the automotive industry. Figure 5.4 indicates that about 2800 kg of solid waste isproduced in the materials processing/manufacturing life-cycle stage for a generic vehicle. As part of anotherLCI study, Rogers (2000) partitions the purely manufacturing-related waste (totaling about 860 kg/vehicle)as shown in Figure 5.5. As is evident much of this waste may be termed “engineered scrap,” i.e., materialbuilt into a part that must subsequently be removed through processing. Examples of this type of scrapinclude the gates, risers, and sprues that are produced in casting processes. Casting sand represents anotherlarge solid waste contributor (about 120 kg/vehicle or 2 million tons/year for the U.S. automotive industry).Used foundry sands contain organic binders and heavy metals that could leach out upon disposal, and thusmust be treated as hazardous waste. Casting processes also produce airborne emissions of environmentalconcern (NOx, VOCs, etc.). For non-ferrous metals, die casting is a widely utilized process, and thewastewater produced by die cooling represents an environmental improvement opportunity. Lost foamcasting (expendable pattern casting) is another frequently employed operation, and the airborne emissionsfrom the process are receiving increasing scrutiny.

Fig. 5.5. Sources of manufacturing waste for a generic U.S. vehicle (Rogers 2000).

U.S. automakers (under the banner of USCAR) are collaborating with the U.S. Air Force, EPA, AFS(American Foundry Society), and the California EPA on the Casting Emissions Reduction Program (CERP).CERP’s mission is to improve/develop foundry materials and processes that enable the U.S. casting industryto be competitive and minimize environment impact. A current example of reducing casting process energyrequirements is found at Kubota, where gas dryers were replaced with microwave dryers for drying corecoatings.

To lower the environmental impact of casting processes, the quantity of parting and cooling agents should becurtailed. More benign expendable pattern materials should be investigated. Also of interest would be newuses for spent foundry sands and/or new casting methods that utilize different reusable or recyclablematerials. Finally, and perhaps most importantly, there is a need to improve casting processaccuracy/precision so that net-shape products can be produced, thus avoiding subsequent downstreamprocesses.


Sheet Metal Working

Another source of the “engineered scrap” highlighted in Figure 5.5 are sheet metal working operations. Forexample, for stamping processes typically 40% of metal ends up as scrap. Research is needed into sheetmetal forming processes that will reduce scrap production. To achieve higher vehicle energy efficiencies,lighter and thinner sheet materials will be employed. Since designers/manufacturers have less experiencewith these materials, research is needed to support their use in automotive applications. New processingtechnologies such as hydroforming and superplastic forming offer environmental advantages and meritcontinuing investigation, as does the processing of Tailor welded blanks.

Glass Manufacturing

Automotive glass manufacturing is the process with the largest energy consumption per kilogram of product(approximately 1 MJ/kg according to the DOE Glass Industry Roadmap). The production of virgin glass ismore energy intensive than the production of recycled product. For both cases, glass production requireslarge amounts of energy (acquired via carbon-based fuel sources) and results in significant CO2, NOx, andSOx emissions. Composition, coating, and tempering improvements, along with improved process control,can reduce the quantity of manufacturing pieces rejected and thus reduce overall energy consumption.

According to USCAR’s Vehicle Recycling Partnership, while the technology exists to recycle automotivewindshields, at present it is not economically feasible. It currently costs more to recover windshields for therecycling infrastructure than it does to send them to landfills. This may change as more plastic laminates—e.g., polyvinyl butyral (PVB)—are used in windshields. About 3% of ASR is associated with the windshield.

Painting/Coating

Historically, the set of processes (including coating and painting operations) used to produce an appealingfinish for the vehicle body has resulted in the largest per vehicle emissions of volatile organic compounds(VOCs) and hazardous air pollutants (HAPs). These emissions are being reduced as automakers transitionfrom oil-based paints to water-based paints. Research appears to be progressing on the development ofpowder or slurry paint applications, which are superior to oil- and water-based paints in terms of emissions.One of the principal challenges of powder paints is achieving an acceptable surface quality. It is estimatedthat the energy requirements for painting and its associated processes account for over 50% of the energyconsumption in an assembly plant. Germany and the U.S. appear to be the leaders in the development of newpaint technologies, with Japan placing less emphasis on airborne emissions. The range of paint technologiesthat are being used across the industry is very large, and the degree of control being exercised on airborneemissions is also highly variable from plant to plant. As with any new technology, much work remains toidentify successful operating conditions—in this case, conditions that produce finishes attractive to theconsumer.

GM researchers have identified steel pre-coating as one desirable solution to some of the painting-relatedconcerns. Steel coils delivered in a coated/primed form may offer the following advantages: improvedcorrosion resistance, reduced environmental burden, reduced paint shop investment, lower losses torust/stain, and reduction in stamping process lubricants. Of course, the use of pre-coated/primed steel sheetin lieu of painting has a number of technical challenges: development of appropriate coating formulation,suitability for welding and forming operations, corrosion protection, adhesion properties, color matching, andcompatibility with existing systems.

Plating

Historically, heavy metals such as chromium and nickel have been used to prepare decorative coatings, e.g.,chrome bumpers. These coatings are applied through a plating process in which the part is immersed in aseries of baths. Metal plating facilities can release a variety of toxic compounds. Chlorinated hydrocarbonsmay be emitted during pre-cleaning (degreasing) of metal parts, and caustic mists, cyanides, and metals arereleased from the actual electroplating process. Hexavalent chromium, a carcinogen, is of particular concernfor worker and public exposure. Development of better emission containment and recovery are priorities herefor existing processes. Also, research needs to be completed into less hazardous coating materials.


Machining

Machining processes (e.g., milling, boring, grinding, and drilling) are inherently wasteful in that theirpurpose is to remove material from a component (engineered waste). However, at present, there are fewalternatives to machining in terms of producing acceptable dimensional accuracy/precision and surfacefinish. Offal or chips produced by machining operations are routinely recycled, assuming they have not beencontaminated with other materials or cutting fluids. (Contaminated chip disposal is an expense whileuncontaminated chip recycling is a revenue.) Metalworking fluids are commonly used for lubrication,cooling, chip flushing, and part corrosion protection in machining operations. Metalworking fluid mists are arecognized occupational health hazard (Hands et al. 1996; Heitbrink et al. 2000). Dermal exposure to cuttingfluids may cause a variety of skin ailments. These facts highlight the importance of mist control andindustrial hygiene considerations. Research is needed on the advancement of improved mistcollection/control/air handling strategies and worker protection systems, including the development of fluidsthat are less prone to aerosol formation (Marano et al. 1995) or that do not represent an inhalation hazard.

The disposal/treatment cost of used fluid is high, as are the other fluid-related costs (fluid recirculation, misthandling, maintenance, etc.). Recent European studies (Cselle and Baramani 1995) report that these costsmay constitute 10-20% of the total costs in some production facilities. While these costs are somewhat less inthe U.S., the costs and health-related liabilities do point out the growing importance of decisions regardingmetalworking fluids. The degradation and therefore rate of disposal of metalworking fluids can beaccelerated by improper fluid maintenance (failure to control bacteria growth, tramp oils, contaminants, etc.).Thus, work is needed to establish appropriate fluid system maintenance procedures and develop fluids thatare robust to contaminants and slow to degrade. The development of better fluid recycling technologies isalso a priority.

Another approach to reducing the environmental problems associated with cutting fluids is to stop usingthem, i.e., employ dry machining. Dry machining avoids many of the costs previously noted associated withthe use of cutting fluids (and also has positive environmental and health effects). Several materials have beentraditionally cut dry (e.g., cast iron), and research is underway on the development of technologies/strategiesto achieve dry machining for more ductile materials such as aluminum. In the drilling and tapping ofaluminum, cutting fluids provide lubrication that under dry conditions must be achieved by other means (newcutting tool coatings for example). While not completely dry, MQL (minimal quantity lubrication), i.e., theapplication of fluid at very low flow rates, is being pursued by both machine tool builders and end users. Inthe absence of a cutting fluid, issues such as heat transfer from the workpiece and chip flushing must begiven special consideration.

Machine tool builder EX-CELL-O is developing new machine tool concepts where chips are allowed to fallthrough the center of the machine onto a chip conveyor (rather than off the front or rear of the machine).They are also working to standardize the heights of their machines to make them more interchangeable. EX-CELL-O is also a leader in the development of MQL technologies, where nearly dry machining is achievedby applying cutting fluid at rates on the order of ml/hour. Company representatives also indicated that for dryor nearly dry machining, the management of heat in and around the machine tool is absolutely essential toavoid workpiece thermal distortion problems.

At the 1999 NCMS (National Center for Manufacturing Sciences) Fall Workshop, several machine toolbuilders expressed concern over the long term reliability of machine tools in the absence of cutting fluids. Itwas indicated that the dust/chips produced under dry conditions could accelerate the wear rates of machinetool components.

Joining

Joining operations (including adhesive bonding and welding) produce a variety of wastes and can consumeconsiderable amounts of energy. With adhesive bonding, epoxy resins may be used to join metallic or non-metallic materials to one another. Some of these adhesives generate VOCs and produce other airbornecontaminants. Components that are to be joined via an adhesive bond often require some surface preparation(e.g., cleaning and degreasing) to ensure adequate/intimate contact between the adhesive material and thecomponents—also having an environmental consequence. Another type of joining operation, soldering, is


discussed in detail in the electronics section. Mechanical joining uses physical means to hold componentstogether (e.g., screws and bolts). The environmental effects of such operations are largely associated with theenergy required to perform the operation and the manufacture of the fasteners. It may be noted that, unlikemany other joining methods, mechanical joining operations can often be reversed, which may offer someenvironmental advantage in terms of product recycling/remanufacture.

One of the most common types of joining operations are the welding processes, and in fact, resistance spotwelding is the predominant means of joining sheet metal in auto body manufacturing. Welding operationscan produce the following emissions: carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, ozone, dusts, and metallic fumes.The airborne particulate matter may include lead, cadmium, cobalt, copper, manganese, silica, and fluoridecompounds. Additional wastes that may be generated include used filler rods and electrodes, heat, andelectromagnetic radiation (possibly resulting in retinal damage). NIOSH (1988) has reported a number ofhealth-related concerns associated with welding. Control of welding generated HAPs is clearly a priority, andthe auto industry appears to be managing this concern effectively. Reducing the amount of welds (wherepossible) will reduce energy consumption and process wastes. Also desirable is research focused onimproving welding technology for aluminum.

Plastics Processing

Many of the environmental challenges of plastics/polymer processing lie within the chemical industry ratherthan the automotive industry, and a previous section has addressed these challenges in detail. However,several points about plastics processing relative to the automotive industry deserve further comments here.Plastics processing (molding, extruding, etc.) generally requires large amounts of externally applied energy,though there are some recent innovations such as reaction injection molding, where heat is supplied by anexothermic reaction. The use of recycled plastics in automotive components is challenging due to the largenumber of polymer formulations and additives, and also because the polymer molecules degrade as they arereprocessed. Thermosets (commonly used in engineering applications and particularly in the electronicsindustry) present another problem in that they cannot be recycled. The use of polymer foams offerssignificant benefits in terms of weight reduction, although the blowing agent may represent an environmentalconcern. Polymer processing operations can produce contaminated wastewater, and under the high heat andpressure associated with molding processes, HAPs may be produced.

Part Washing

In the past solvents were often used to clean components, i.e., remove grease, dirt, and other foreign matter.To reduce HAPs (specifically VOCs), large manufacturers have moved to aqueous cleaning methods that areperformed at elevated temperatures/pressures, often under acid or basic conditions. The wastewater producedduring these cleaning operations represents an environmental concern and requires treatment. The energyconsumed by the process is also an issue that has received little attention. Finally, the process is an aerosolsource and little is known about the composition and therefore the health effects of the airborne particulateproduced by such operations. Of course, actions should be pursued that can eliminate processes such as partwashing that add no value to a part and generate environmental and worker health concerns.

In closing this section, it should be noted that automobile manufacturers are large, sophisticated globalcorporations. They follow one another very closely and quickly adopt new technologies if they offereconomic/competitive advantages. However, the environmental landscape is changing quickly in the U.S.and abroad, and failure to achieve leadership or at least closely follow the environment-related manufacturingtechnology leaders may lead to loss of market share.

As stated by John Logan before the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation (Oct.28, 1999), “Being second to market with innovation is not the way to maintain industrial leadership. That isnot a situation in which we should want to place our key industrial sectors.”

Use Issues

The usage stage of the vehicle life cycle has large environmental impacts in terms of both resourceconsumption and the creation of wastes. It consumes 84% of the energy and produces 94% of the CO, 90%


of the NOx, 62% of the SOx, and 91% of the non-methane hydrocarbon emissions (Sullivan et al. 1998).There are a number of excellent on-line references to the environmental activities underway related to theusage stage of automobiles. These include the Web sites of the automakers (GM 2000; Ford 2000;DaimlerChrysler 2000; Toyota 2000; Honda 2000) and other organizations (EPA 2000; DOE 2000; USCAR2000).

Automakers based in the U.S., Japan, and Europe are all involved in activities directed at improving the fuelefficiency of their vehicles. In the U.S., under the aegis of USCAR, the Partnership for a New Generation ofVehicles (PNGV) has as one of its goals the production of an 80 mpg vehicle that meets the Tier II Clean AirAct Amendments gaseous emission standards and applicable ultra-low emission particulate standards. PNGVconcept vehicles (utilizing compression-ignition direct-injection (CIDI) diesel engines) have recently beenintroduced according to the PNGV schedule by GM (Precept), Ford (Prodigy), and DaimlerChrysler (ESX3).Production models are scheduled to appear in 2004. In Europe efforts are also underway to develop highmileage vehicles. For example, DaimlerChrysler recently unveiled a “3 liter vehicle,” also a diesel, that uses3.4 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (68 miles per gallon) and that produces CO2 emissions of less than 90grams per kilometer. In Japan Toyota has produced the PRIUS hybrid vehicle that offers fuel economy near60 mpg and emissions low enough to qualify the car as a Super Ultra Low Emissions Vehicle (SULEV).Honda’s Insight hybrid also meets California's Ultra-Low Emission Vehicle (ULEV) standard and has a fuelefficiency of approximately 65 mpg. The other automakers also will soon be introducing hybrids. Table 5.4summarizes the differences between the various low emission vehicle types.

Table 5.4California Low Emission Vehicle Classifications (emissions in g/mi)

Vehicle Type Averaged over 50,000 mi Averaged over 100,000 mi

NMOG* CO NOx NMOG* CO NOx

LEV: Low Emission Vehicle 0.075 3.4 0.2 0.090 4.2 0.3

ULEV: Ultra Low Emission Vehicle 0.040 1.7 0.2 0.055 2.1 0.3

SULEV: Super Ultra Low Emission Vehicle A category of vehicle with emissions less than ULEV.

ZEV: Zero Emissions Vehicle A category of vehicle defined that has no tailpipe emissions. At present, this appliesonly to electric vehicles.

* Non-methane organic gases.

One of the principal challenges associated with achieving high mileage vehicles is to simultaneously meet therelevant emission standards. The U.S. (and more specifically, the State of California) has some of the world’smost stringent air quality standards. EPA’s Tier II tailpipe standards require nitrogen oxide emissions lessthan 0.07 g/mi and particulate matter (PM) emissions less than 0.01 g/mi for all classes of passenger vehiclesbeginning in 2004. Figure 5.6 illustrates the Tier II requirements relative to the Tier I standards. Thisincludes all light-duty trucks, as well as the largest SUVs. Vehicles weighing less than 6000 pounds will bephased-in to this standard between 2004 and 2007. For the heaviest light-duty trucks, a three step approach toreducing emissions will be followed to achieve compliance by 2009 (EPA 2000a).

Fig. 5.6. Tier I and Tier II EPA air quality standards.


According to Zorpette (1999) the Tier II standards may present a problem for the PNGV, because the ULEVemission rates may be impossible to meet in a supercar that meets the other desired attributes. For a hybrid-electric car even to approach a fuel efficiency of 80 mpg would most likely require the use of a diesel engine,which produces more particle emissions than a traditional spark-combustion engine. A traditional spark-combustion engine, on the other hand, might satisfy particulate emission goals but would be unlikely to meetboth the fuel-efficiency and the low-NOx requirements.

Kubota has adopted a strategy of developing/building engines that meet the world’s tightest emissionregulations (rather than having different engines for different markets). According to Kubota personnel, anaudit of a group of engines indicated compliance with Tier I requirements and emissions just within the TierII standards. However, at present, existing manufacturing and assembly processes are likely to produce anumber of engines not capable of meeting design intent. Quality improvement activities are therefore neededto continue to improve the precision of Kubota’s manufacturing and assembly processes.

A number of research activities and initiatives are underway that are directed at reducing the environmentalimpact resulting from automobile use. These initiatives include the reduction of vehicle weight, developmentof alternative fuels, and development of alternative power sources. The issue of vehicle weight reduction hasbeen discussed previously in the context of material selection. A variety of alternative fuels for vehicles arebeing investigated: compressed natural gas, methanol, ethanol (unlike methanol, ethanol is non-poisonousand non-corrosive), diesel, etc. Research into cleaner burning diesel fuels may enable the development of ahybrid vehicle that achieves the emission and fuel economy goals associated with the PNGV initiative.MacLean and Lave (2000) have studied the environmental implications of alternative-fueled automobiles inregards to air quality and greenhouse gas trade-offs. They concluded that compressed natural gas vehicleshave the best exhaust emission performance while direct injected diesels had the worst. However,greenhouse gases can be reduced with direct injected diesels and direct injected compressed natural gasrelative to a conventional fueled automobile.

Of course, much research is underway on the development of alternative power sources (engines) forautomobiles. Figure 5.7 shows estimated fuel economies for a variety of these power sources. This includeswork on CIDI (compression ignition-direct injection) diesel engines, electric or battery power, hybridvehicles (engine and battery power), and fuel cell technology. The challenges and advantages of diesels havebeen addressed previously, and certainly diesel technology does not eliminate dependence on carbon-basedfuels. Electric vehicles are currently being produced, but at present, high cost and marginal performancelimits their broad consumer acceptance. Battery technology is a limiting factor, and unless a breakthrough isachieved, electric vehicles seem to represent a transition technology. Hybrid vehicles counter some of theperformance concerns of purely electric vehicles; however, cost is still a concern. Hybrids appear to be aneffective near term answer to transportation needs, but it seems unlikely that a vehicle with two powersources is an efficient long-term solution.

Hydrogen as a fuel source seems to be the most promising long-term solution. It is envisioned that fuel celltechnology can then be employed to combine hydrogen with oxygen to create energy and produce watervapor as waste. The energy is then used to power a traction motor that drives the wheels. On-board storage ofuncompressed hydrogen gas occupies about 3,000 times more space than gasoline under ambient conditionsand must therefore be pressurized and liquefied, or stored as a slurry or solid (e.g., metal hydride and carbonadsorption). On-board storage of hydrogen or a hydrogen impregnated carrier may initially be met withresistance by consumers and significant infrastructure changes will be required (transportation via pipelines,H2 stations, etc.). The required hydrogen can also be extracted (or reformed) from a conventional fuel (e.g.,gasoline). This appears to be an effective transitional approach, especially in light of the challengesassociated with accomplishing the required infrastructure changes for on-board hydrogen storage. The longterm role of on-board reforming is unlikely since it does produce emissions and does not eliminate relianceon carbon-based fuels. On-board storage of hydrogen presents a number of significant technical challengesincluding embrittlement and leak issues. Then, there is the issue of where the energy comes from to generatethe hydrogen (from water). The use of carbon-based fuels is not the preferred solution to this problem—cleaner solutions are solar/wind power (i.e., renewable energy sources). However, it may be that only nuclearpower can produce hydrogen in sufficient quantities for use as an automotive fuel.


Fig. 5.7. Fuel economy estimates for various vehicle configurations. Except for “current,” configurationchassis/body is PNGV-class. PFI/SI: port fuel injection/spark ignition. CIDI: compression

ignition/direct injection. AdvSI: advanced spark ignition (NRC 1998).

As stated previously, this WTEC study is primarily concerned with environmental issues surroundingmanufacturing processes/systems. This brief overview of some of the environmental issues surrounding theautomotive product only begins to address this complex issue. The next ten to twenty years will likely see anumber of technology changes, both planned and unanticipated, and a wide range of vehicle and fuel types.The broad acceptance of any of these products is very dependent on the ability of the automakers to produceit cost-effectively. Thus, the economic success associated with these vehicles of the future is dependent onthe manufacturing processes/systems of the future.

Post-use Issues

The automobile is one of the most highly recycled consumer products. About 95% of retired cars enter therecycling system, and approximately 75% of each car in the system is recycled (Cobas-Flores et al. 1998). Inspite of these seemingly large rates, the post-use stage of the vehicle life cycle still generates a significantamount of solid waste (roughly 300 kg/vehicle) (Sullivan et al. 1998). When a car is viewed as no longerhaving any useful life, it is transferred to a dismantler. The dismantler removes components that may beresold for their material content (e.g., battery and catalytic converter) or as spare parts (body panels,wheels/tires, alternators, etc.). The remaining vehicle then passes to a shredding facility where largemachines (shredders) cut the hulk into small pieces (6-10 cm in size). The pieces are then sorted into threestreams: ferrous metals, non-ferrous metals, and automotive shredder residue (ASR). The sorted metals aresold to scrap metal dealers who serve as suppliers to primary metal processors (for example, steel mills). Inother countries the energy content of ASR is recovered through incineration. In the U.S. the ASR (largelymetal and fluid contaminated polymers) is generally landfilled. However, with landfills closing in NewJersey and elsewhere on the East Coast, incineration is becoming more common. A high proportion ofvehicles is recycled because market-based incentives exist that promote the activity; virtually every materialtransfer involves some cash flow.

Graedel and Allenby (1998) make several key points with respect to the automobile recycling system thatexists today. Just because a product is physically capable of being recycled does not mean the technology andeconomics support recycling. The automobile recycling system can be derailed at any step if the technologyor costs are unfavorable. For example, prior to the wide use of vehicle shredding in the 1960s metal recoveryfrom vehicles was difficult. In the 1970s as steelmakers switched from open hearth to basic oxygen furnacesthe amount of scrap steel that could be accommodated was significantly lowered, again hampering recyclingefforts. These “lessons learned” should be kept in mind as we contemplate legislative initiatives, newmaterials, new vehicle concepts, etc. It must also be remembered that the decisions made today may not seetheir real impact for decades, i.e., the lifetime of a car.


It appears that the end-of-life handling of vehicles, such as described above, may soon change. Motivated bythe diminishing availability of landfill space in Europe and Japan (and for that matter in large U.S.metropolitan areas), take-back regulations are being established that mandate vehicle return at the end-of-lifeand call for higher recovery rates for automobile recycling. Generalizing, it appears that by about 2005 an85% recycling recovery rate and by 2015 a 95% rate will be required. These rates both include a smallpercentage of energy recovery associated with the incineration/pyrolysis of ASR. As might be expected,automakers are concerned about these targets and the take-back requirement. As challenging as thesepercentages appear, they will be even more challenging in the future as the ferrous metal content in thevehicle is reduced in favor of lighter metals and plastics to achieve higher fuel efficiencies.

A recent European Union directive calls for the re-use and recycling (recovery) of end-of-life vehicles andtheir components, with a view to reducing waste disposal. No later than January 2006, the re-use andrecycling of end-of-life vehicles are to be increased to a minimum of 80%. No later than January 2015, re-useand recycling are to be increased to a minimum of 85%.

In October 1996, Japan’s Ministry of International Trade and Industry proposed a recycling target of 85% by2002, and a target of 95% by 2015.

In November 1998, the government of Belgium's Flanders region introduced a take-back obligation thatrequires the last owner to hand in end-of-life vehicles to licensed recovery centers (or to car dealers if theybuy a new car). Disposing of a vehicle in this way carries no charge. By 2005, 85% of each vehicle is to berecovered (up to 5% energy recovery allowed), and by 2015 the recovery rate must reach 95% (up to 10%energy recovery).

Given the need to increase recycling rates from their current level of about 75%, a principal challenge is toattack the remaining 25% that is associated with ASR. Altschuller (1997) provides an excellent discussion ofthe challenges associated with addressing the ASR associated with vehicle end-of-life. There are threeprincipal strategies for enhancing the amount of the vehicle that is recycled or re-used:

• Expanded application of ASR pyrolysis and incineration

• Heightened use of ASR or ASR derived materials in products

• Increased utility of vehicle dismantling and component re-use approaches

Of course, it is unclear what effect any of these three strategies (or even the regulations being established inEurope and Japan) will have on the stability of the present vehicle recycling infrastructure. And, if thepresent recycling infrastructure is displaced with a more dismantling-oriented system, little thought has beengiven to the transition between the two systems.

One approach for dealing with ASR is pyrolysis. By heating the largely organic materials that constitute ASRin the absence of oxygen, it is possible to generate low grade petrochemicals, along with ash and heat. If thepetrochemicals produced from pyrolysis are unable to serve as feedstock for manufacturing processes, thenincineration is a better alternative for the recovery of ASR energy content. While pyrolysis is technologicallyfeasible, its implementation is inhibited by the present economics of automobile recycling. The potentialprofit from the sale of the petrochemicals (pyro-gas and pyro-oil) does not offset the combined costs ofacquiring the technology and procuring the ASR feedstock. The principal advantage of both pyrolysis andincineration appears to be in keeping material out of landfills rather than profit. The economics of both aredependent upon the process efficiencies and whether the ASR feedstock must be purchased (will shredderspay to dispose of their ASR waste?). Both pyrolysis and incineration are potential pollution sources, althoughnew technology appears to control airborne emissions fairly well. In fact, one German Web site reports that amodern waste incineration plant has less emissions than the trucks delivering the waste input. The issue ofhazardous waste also represents an issue of concern (e.g., dioxins and chlorine).

According to one German consulting company, GUA (Gesellschaft für umfassende Analysen), recentEuropean legislation (issued in Germany, Austria, Switzerland, Scandinavia and the Benelux countries)stipulates that virtually no organic carbon shall be disposed in landfills. A typical regulation is to restrict thecontent of total organic carbon in all landfill materials to 5% by weight. This goal can only be reached


through significant waste incineration. The majority of the population now accepts the fact that wasteincineration is less harmful to the environment than landfilling.

Certainly, seeking another use for the materials within the ASR is preferable to incineration. Much researchhas been performed and continues on this issue. Researchers at Argonne National Laboratory have developedan ASR separation technique that separates the ASR into three categories: polyurethane foam (15-20% ofASR by weight), particulate iron "fines" (30-40%), and plastics (about 50%). Materials in the first twocategories have market value. The foam can be used again (e.g., carpet padding or automotive applications).The iron fines are contaminated with other light metals, but can be used as feedstock for other products.Research is still needed to address the plastics-dominated balance of the ASR (Altschuller 1997). Toyota(Kajiwara 2000) has established an ASR recovery plant that can process 100 tons of ASR per day and is ableto increase the vehicle recovery rate to 87%. The processes used in the plant are performed dry, and marketsfor the streams emanating from the facility have been established (bricks, sound absorption materials, etc.).The facility operates as a subsidiary to Toyota.

The two approaches (incineration/pyrolysis and separation) that are focused on the processing of ASRessentially seek to work within the existing vehicle recycling infrastructure. This infrastructure relies heavilyon shredding processes and is focused on material recovery rather than the recovery of individualcomponents. Some researchers envision that it will require a sea change in the vehicle recycling system toachieve the high recycling rates referred to earlier. This view calls for the dismantling of vehicles, reuse ofcomponents where possible, and the recycling of the remaining materials. This comprehensive dismantlingprocess differs substantially from the process being undertaken at present. As has been stated previously,currently only those components that can be readily removed and easily marketed are addressed. Acomprehensive vehicle dismantling process involves taking apart the car piece by piece: fluids, engine, body,interior, etc. This more thorough dismantling/disassembly process would greatly reduce the amount ofmaterial that is shredded and therefore reduce the quantity of ASR. In part enabled by higher levels ofunemployment, nascent dismantling activities are underway in Europe (including those by U.S.-basedautomakers), but more research is needed in this area. Attention must also be devoted to designingautomobiles that are compatible with such dismantling activities. In the U.S., one company (ComprehensiveAutomotive Reclamation Services (CARS) of Maryland) is engaged in the total dismantling concept usingtechnology from the Netherlands. The Netherlands is a leader in state-of-the-art dismantling systems becauseits National Environmental Policy Plan finances environmentally sound automobile recycling (Johnson1995).

Robert M. Day (World Resources Institute) notes that “proactive companies take a leadership position thatallows them some influence over the form of future constraints. A good example is BMW’s leadership on theissue of product take-back in Germany. By taking a visible leadership position on the issue, BMWanticipated, and even promoted, new regulatory take-back requirements which, because it held a strongmarket position in automobile disassembly, not only helped reduce waste but also provided it with a marketadvantage.”

An overview of the challenges associated with vehicle end-of-life has been provided. Motivated by theirlimited landfill space, regulations have been established in Europe that call for very high vehicle recyclingrates. Similar regulations are being established in Japan. Given the existing recycling infrastructure, ASRincineration and pyrolysis (to recover energy content) are the easiest techniques to reduce the amount ofmaterial going to landfills. Other strategies seek to recover the original materials from the ASR (Argonnemethod). Europe is pioneering the use of vehicle dismantling techniques that could dramatically change thevehicle recycling infrastructure. Take-back regulations do not exist in the U.S., and given the relativeabundance of landfill space, there is little economic incentive domestically to address the ASR problem.However, automakers based in the U.S. must abide with the regulations of Europe and Japan for the vehiclesthat are sold there. As a consequence, they are closely following developments overseas.

System-level Issues

Previous sections have addressed environmental issues for various stages of the vehicle life cycle: materials,manufacturing, use, and post-use. There are several topics related to the automotive industry that could not beaccommodated as part of this classification scheme. These subjects include inter-company relationship


challenges, industry-government concerns, standards, the role of e-commerce, and philosophical changes inhow a company views its business. A brief discussion of several of these issues is provided below.

The future of transportation (including the effects of such topics as e-commerce) is addressed by Graedel andAllenby (1998). They conclude that cultural trends will not greatly impact the short-term increase in the sizeof the automobile sector and that the impact of e-commerce will not reduce the size of the automobile sectornor reduce the number of miles traveled by society. The number of automobiles will increase in the future.Research is needed on a variety of topics to support this growth in an environmentally sound manner. Thesetopics include the development of new energy sources, more efficient energy storage systems, and advancedmaterials. In addition, research is needed that is directed at the development and maintenance of the completetransportation system to reduce its energy intensity and rate of resource consumption.

One of the disturbing trends that surfaced during the course of the site visits conducted during this studyconcerned a significant difference between the U.S. companies and those in Europe and Japan. Individualsfrom U.S.-based plants frequently commented that existing regulations tend to inhibit technology changesthat could result in positive environmental effects. It seems that once a given process technology has beenformally approved, as new (better) technologies are developed the burden to pursue the formal approval ofthese new technologies is often so large that the technology changes are not pursued. This appears to be insharp contrast to industry-government interactions abroad where there is a common vision regardingtechnological innovations directed at environmental improvement and economic development.

All of the automakers and suppliers that were visited, as well as those identified via the Internet and thetechnical literature, are pursuing or have achieved some level of ISO 14000 certification. While theEuropean-based organizations appear to view this pursuit as completely consonant with their overallenvironmental strategy, attitudes in Japan and the U.S. seem to be more focused on certification as a hurdleto achieve market entry. Automakers in the U.S., Japan, and Europe all have well documented environmentalstrategies. In the U.S. the Tier 1 suppliers are also literate with regard to environmental issues, although therewas some variability evident in the commitment level of the suppliers to environmental issues. Allautomakers are asking their suppliers to become ISO 14000 certified, and again, there was variability inwhere the suppliers stand in this certification process. The expectation is that this ISO certificationrequirement will be passed through the supply chain.

GM and Ford suppliers have notified their Tier 1 suppliers that they need to be ISO 14001 certified by theend of 2002.

The management and synthesis of information across the automotive supply chain is an issue that extendswell beyond the topic of environmentally benign manufacturing. There are a number of open issues abouthow to propagate environmental measures across the supply chain. For example, as the automakers tracktheir energy usage from year to year, how can the energy usage of the suppliers be properly incorporated?Supplier data on emissions, wastes, and resource consumption are also needed, and techniques for combiningall this information are needed. It is clear that much work will be required before some of the ISO 14000standards will be met (e.g., ISO 14020 series on eco-labelling).

Several representatives of the automakers were queried about corporate trends in selling “product use” ratherthan the product itself. Under such a scenario, the manufacturer (or its agent) would retain ownership of theproduct and consumers would pay to use the product. While they were aware of this concept, there does notappear to be any concerted effort to move the industry in that direction. On the other hand, the auto industrydoes distribute approximately 30% of its vehicles through lease programs, and one could argue that this is infact “selling use.” There did not appear to be any significant differences in attitudes to this idea across thesites that were visited.

Building upon the thought of the previous paragraph, the notions of product stewardship, extended producerresponsibility, and vehicle take-back represent considerable challenges to the auto industry. This isespecially true in light of the trend in the U.S. for automakers to delegate more and more of theirmanufacturing tasks to their suppliers. It is unclear who will be responsible for end-of-life vehicles.Certainly, communication with suppliers indicated that most do not believe they have any extended


responsibility for a product after it has been sold to their customer. Given the previous comments about thepost-use stage of the vehicle’s life cycle, it is likely that these issues will first be addressed in Europe.

In closing this section, one of the principal differences that was evident between the U.S. and Japan/Europewas the attitude of consumers toward vehicles. While consumers in the U.S. have recently complained aboutthe high cost of gasoline, the prices are still well below the prices abroad. The high cost of driving andmaintaining a vehicle in Europe/Japan has, in part, created consumer habits/attitudes that differ remarkablyfrom those practiced by individuals in the U.S. It is hard to imagine wide consumer acceptance inJapan/Europe of SUVs that are presently so popular in the U.S. A large gap exists between the environmentalawareness of consumers in the U.S. and those in Europe and Japan. Clearly, efforts must be undertaken tobetter educate the U.S. public on matters related to the environment and resource conservation.

Summary

The automotive industry is one of the largest and most important industries in the world. As part of thisstudy, sites were visited in Japan, Europe, and the U.S. The following general observations about theemphases each country places on the environment are described below:

• In Japan the focus is on reduction of solid waste and energy usage/CO2 emissions.

• In Europe attention is directed at reducing solid waste and achieving ISO 14000 certification.

• In the U.S. emphasis is directed at compliance with government regulations and promoting workersafety.

In terms of public recognition of environmental issues, Europe appears to be the leader closely followed byJapan, with the U.S. being a distant third. European governments are rapidly establishing a number ofenvironment-related regulations, and Japanese industry closely tracks activities in Europe. With a fewnotable exceptions (e.g., the DOE Office of Industrial Technologies), the U.S. government is largely focusedon penalizing non-compliance with regulations rather than promoting environmental improvements. (In theirdefense, many of these organizations were created for the purpose of enforcement.) Company-to-companydifferences in terms of the environment are far less than those from country to country.

Environmental issues surround each stage of the vehicle life cycle (materials, manufacturing, use, and post-use) and there are a number of system oriented issues as well. Research on the following topics is needed toaddress challenges associated with each life-cycle stage:

• Materials: development of technologies to support the use of light weight materials

• Manufacturing: reduced waste and improved energy efficiency of processes, including casting, sheetmetal working, glass manufacturing, painting/coating/plating, machining, joining, plastics processing,and part washing

• Use: advancement in alternative fuel/engine/power plant technology to achieve higher fuel economiesand lower emissions

• Post-use: improved recovery rates of ASR and increased attention to disassembly and dismantling;assessment of the economics/stability of the vehicle end-of-life system

• System: role of suppliers and the management of information in the supply chain, and productstewardship

It would also seem prudent to re-examine company-government interactions and the role of regulations inpromoting environmental improvements. Do the existing relationships and regulations simply requirecompliance or do they promote never-ending improvement? Lastly, and perhaps most important, the U.S.public lags far behind other nations in environmental awareness—strategies should be undertaken to closethis gap.


ELECTRONICS (C.F. MURPHY)

Summary

The dual trends of growing consumption and decreasing product life spans presents a serious end-of-lifeissue for electronic products. For example, PCs (personal computers) are expected to see a six-fold increasein the obsolescence rate over a six year span, reaching about 65 million PCs per year in 2003. Furthermore,as the PC has evolved, there is a tendency toward material compositions that are less economical to recycle.The volume of precious and base metals used on integrated circuits and printed wiring boards has decreased,and the housings are more commonly made of engineering thermoplastics rather than steel. In addition to theend-of-life issues surrounding electronics, there are significant environmental impacts associated withelectronics manufacturing, particularly from wafer fabrication processes. These processes, which arecharacterized by gaseous deposition, ultra-clean manufacturing environments, and in some cases low yields,result in high amounts of waste and wastewater, high usage of energy, and the emission of materials ofconcern, including perfluoro compounds. Because of their importance, these issues have received researchsupport through a variety of programs sponsored by SEMATECH, the National Science Foundation and theEnvironmental Protection Agency. Strategies to address issues at the wafer fab level have been outlined inthe SIA (Semiconductor Industry Association) roadmap. A separate set of environmental issues isencountered at the printed wiring board and board level assembly steps. These include laminate manufactureand processing, cleaning, plating, etching, and various through-hole-plating and interconnect technologies.However, the current major focus is on lead-free solders. Driven primarily, if not exclusively, by theEuropean Union’s Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) Directive, there has been a strongincentive for electronics companies worldwide to develop alternatives to tin-lead (Sn-Pb) solder. (For furtherinformation on the WEEE Directive, see Committee on the Environment…2000.) Lastly there is a movetoward the elimination of brominated flame retardants (BFRs), driven by the WEEE Directive, but also bythe general tendency (outside the U.S.) to incinerate plastics and concern over potential liability associatedwith incineration at temperatures that are below optimum levels.

Introduction

The last decade of the 20th century has seen two defining trends: the explosive growth of electronic andinformation technology and the pervasive concern for environmental protection. These two trends are tightlyinterwoven by technical opportunities (increased function combined with decreased resource utilization),systems approaches to maximize yield and thus minimize waste, and a high-profile industry that has madeenvironmental stewardship a priority. While the electronics industry is not a highly toxic one—with only1.6% of the Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) emissions (MCC 1994)—the processes used to manufacture thecomponents can be extremely wasteful. According to a study sponsored by the Department of Energy (MCC1993), fabrication of the silicon chips used in a workstation (with a total weight of less than an ounce)requires 31 pounds of liquid chemicals and 9 pounds of sodium hydroxide for wastewater neutralization. Theprinted wiring board manufacturing process produces 46 pounds of material waste for a total of 4 pounds offinished product.

In response to these concerns and opportunities, the electronics industry has been one of the worldwideleaders in the area of environmentally benign manufacturing. In particular, electronic product andcomponent manufacturers have been proactive in the areas of life-cycle assessment (LCA), design forenvironment (DFE), and end-of-life management (ELM). The general industry culture of minimization, cost-reduction, and increased efficiency are all compatible with EBM. There are rapid changes in technology thatresult in average product life spans of 18 to 48 months. In addition, design changes often require processchanges, which in turn may result in complete turnovers in capital equipment every 5-10 years.Consequently, design and process changes that benefit the environment may also be incorporated morerapidly and at less marginal cost than might be true in other manufacturing areas. Lastly, as a legacy of thequality movement and because of the complexity of the processes, the electronics industry is expert atmanaging and analyzing large amounts of data. This is key in the implementation, documentation, andmanagement of environmentally benign manufacturing activities.

Focus areas within the electronics industry have been (1) materials of concern, including elimination andsubstitutions, (2) reduction in resource consumption, including product volume reduction, (3) design for


disassembly and reuse, (4) board-level assembly technology and materials, (5) reduction in number ofmaterials used, (6) emissions reductions, and (7) end-of-life disposition.

Electronics Manufacturing Overview

Electronics manufacturing can be divided into several sub-industries. These are wafer fabrication and chip-level packaging, printed wiring board (PWB) manufacture and board-level assembly, display manufacturing,and final assembly. Each of these has specific material sets and EBM issues.

Wafer Fabrication and Chip-level Assembly

Integrated circuits are manufactured on silicon wafers, with each wafer containing hundreds to thousands ofindividual integrated circuits. The wafer fabrication industry is represented by large, highly capital intensivemanufacturers. The largest companies (by sales) are in the U.S., followed by Japan, and Europe. However,there are a number of emerging companies in Taiwan and Korea.

Wafers (and the resulting integrated circuits) are composed of elemental silicon with thin layers of silicondioxide (SiO2), aluminum, and in some cases copper. The manufacturing process consists of deposition ofvery thin layers and etching of patterns into sub-micron features. This involves energy intensive, gaseousprocesses that result in emissions of concern, especially PFCs (perfluoro compounds). In addition,functionality of the circuits is dependent upon ultra-clean surfaces, which in turn requires the use ofsignificant amounts of water. The SIA roadmap (SIA 1999) identified several key concerns forenvironmentally benign manufacturing. These are qualification of new materials, reduction in PFCemissions, and reduction in energy and water usage. SEMATECH, a research consortium of which all of themajor U.S. wafer fabricators are or have been members, has a major thrust area in environmental health andsafety. The key project areas are closely aligned to the SIA roadmap. The NSF also has an ERC(Engineering Research Center) at the University of Arizona focused on environmentally benign manufactureof integrated circuits. This center has been focusing on water usage and chemical mechanical polishing(CMP), a process that uses large amounts of water and produces significant amounts of solid waste. NSF andEPA are also funding a project at the University of Texas (with Motorola and SEMATECH) to developgeneric life-cycle inventory modules for wafer fabrication.

Processes in wafer fabrication are equipment driven; consequently, the relationship between equipmentsuppliers and the wafer fabrication companies is critical. This is true in the area of EBM as well. The panelconducted a site visit at Applied Materials (see Appendix E). It was apparent from the information providedby Applied Materials that it is working very closely with customers to improve the overall environmentfootprint for wafer fabrication.

After wafer fabrication, the individual integrated circuits (chips) are singulated, bonded onto metal alloylead-frames (Ni, Cu, ± Au), and assembled into ceramic or plastic (thermo-set) packages. This process istypically done by the wafer fabrication companies. In relation to other electronics processes, the EBM issuesare relatively minor for this process. The processes do require heat (energy) and produce material waste andmetal-bearing liquid waste.

Individual components are then assembled onto printed wiring boards, as shown in Figure 5.8.

Printed Wiring Board Fabrication and Board-level Assembly

The printed wiring board (PWB) industry consists of many manufacturers of varying size. Most areindependent but some are captive (i.e., a division within an original equipment manufacturer, or OEM).While moderate capital investments are involved, this industry is more material-driven than equipment-driven in comparison to the wafer fabrication industry. Relatively small feature sizes (as fine as 3 to 4 mm)require a relatively clean environment, but much less so than for integrated circuits.


Wafer fabricationChip

singulationChip

packaging

200 mm

2 -10 mm 10 - 30 mm

PWB fabrication

PWB (board-level) assembly

100 - 300 mm

100 - 300 mm

Fig. 5.8. Individual integrated circuits are fabricated on silicon wafers, singulated, packaged and assembledonto printed wiring boards.

The majority of PWBs fabricated today are multi-layer (four or more layers) and are commonly constructedusing polymer composites and copper. The composites, typically epoxy-glass, provide structural integrityand electrical insulation and typically have glass transition temperatures (Tgs) of 140° to 160°C. Tgs in thisrange are compatible with current assembly processes that use lead (Pb) solder; however, with the movetoward Pb-free solders, which require higher process temperatures, it may be necessary for PWBmanufacturers to look at alternative materials for substrates (Miric and Heraeus 2000; Grossman 2000). (Seesite reports for Hitachi and Siemens, Appendices C and D.)

Copper, either plated or etched, provides electrical circuitry. Etched copper lines (within the plane of theboards) are typically passivated using an oxidation process that is water, energy, and chemical intensive.Connectivity between layers for the majority of boards is provided by plated through holes (PTHs) (Figure5.9). Plating baths, used for PTHs and for surface metallization, use large amounts of water and complexchemistries (organic and inorganic compounds). The U.S. EPA Design for Environment (DFE) projectidentified “making holes conductive” as one of the key issues in its initial report (EPA 1995). Subsequentwork explored the environmental impacts and costs of various options (EPA 1997). Another area ofenvironmental concern is lamination of the layers, which uses large presses that are very energy intensive.Solid waste from the drilling process and from excise and trim can also be significant (as much as 50% of thetotal material budget) (Sandborn and McFall 1996).

Epoxy Glass

Copper Foil

Epoxy Glass

Prepreg

Prepreg

Prepreg

Plated Copper

Fig. 5.9. PWBs are typically constructed with epoxy-glass and copper; connectivity between layers is mostcommonly provided by plated through holes (PTHs).

In addition to EPA’s DFE project, the U.S. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA)Environmentally Conscious Manufacturing Program funded a number of industry projects in the mid 1990s


that focused on PWBs (DARPA 1996). This resulted in several technical successes. IBM developed alaminate material derived from renewable resources (lignin derived from pine trees). DuPont commerciallyintroduced a permanent resist that eliminates the need for the copper passivation (oxidation) process.DuPont, Shipley, and Ormet developed several fully additive processes that use microvia technologies inconjunction with photoimagable dielectric (Figure 5.10) (Lott, Quindlen and Vaughan 1997; Lott, Kraus, andMurphy 1997; Sandborn and Murphy 1998; Murphy et al. 1997). These technologies use significantly lesswater and produce less waste than conventional PTH constructions.

Substrate

Dielectric Conductive ink or copper

Conductivepaste

Fig. 5.10. Microvia technologies typically use less water and produce less waste than conventional platedthrough holes.

There are a number of emerging microvia technologies (Rasul, Bratschun, and McGowen 1997; Holden1996). Sony (see Appendix D) and a number of other companies are beginning to incorporate these into theirproducts. While the motivation is typically performance driven, these approaches should all be inherentlymore environmentally friendly. They require fewer layers and smaller areas for the equivalent amount ofwiring, thus reducing the amount of resource consumption for the same function. There is less solid wastebecause the drilling operation is minimized or eliminated. In addition, smaller geometries require greaterprecision in order to maintain yields. This is making it more attractive for companies to invest in the capitalequipment that will allow them to move from mechanical alignment to vision alignment. This in turn resultsin a drastic decrease in the amount of trim waste.

In the area of EBM, one of the biggest challenges for PWB manufacturers in the near future is the use ofbrominated flame retardants (BFRs). This is in large part due to the WEEE Directive, which was approvedby the European Commission on June 13, 2000 (but which must still be formally adopted by the EuropeanParliament prior to being officially implemented). This directive, which bans the use of many substances,including some BFRs, will be discussed in more detail in a subsequent section.

Completed PWBs are prepared for board-level assembly using Sn-Pb solder. The boards are heated to themelting point of the solder and packaged ICs are placed on the boards, typically using pick-and-placemechanical systems. The use of Pb solder dominates the environmental concerns for this process and is akey area of concern for electronics end-of-life.

Displays

Computer displays are predominately cathode ray tubes (CRTs); however, an increasing number of displaysare flat panel displays (FPDs) that are used either in laptop computers or as stand-alone desktop units. Mostsmall- to medium-sized CRTs are manufactured in Japan. Large displays for the U.S. market are made in theU.S., as these units are quite heavy and therefore costly to transport significant distances. During themanufacture of CRTs, the environmental issue is energy consumption due to the extreme temperatures usedto form the glass. The biggest concern surrounding CRTs, however, is the lead that is contained in the funnelglass and in some panel glass and its potential effect on groundwater supplies if placed in landfill.Massachusetts has banned landfilling of CRTs, and at least one large international waste-disposal companyhas considered banning them from all of their landfills as well.

Envirocycle (http://www.enviroinc.com), located in Hallstead, Pennsylvania, has an effective glass-to-glassrecycling program. In a combination manual and automatic process, leaded funnel glass, leaded panel glass,


and unleaded panel glass is sorted. The resultant separated glass is then sold to major CRT glassmanufacturers, principally Techneglas and Corning. These CRT manufacturers are able to incorporate thissorted glass cullet back into new monitors. At the Hallstead site, Envirocycle currently processes 600 tons ofglass per week. However, most monitors in the U.S., Europe, and Japan are recycled by including them insmelting processes.

Flat panel displays are expected to introduce a new set of environmental issues. However, because most aremanufactured overseas using proprietary processes, the exact nature of these problems has not yet beendefined. EPA’s DFE program is currently looking at FPDs to try to characterize their material content (EPA1998b). MIREC (see Appendix C) shreds laptop computers as a single unit in order to avoid having to worryabout whether there might be hazardous materials associated with the FPDs. (As a product, rather than a setof materials, hazardous substances are not controlled.)

Other Components

Nickel/cadmium batteries are a problem due to the cadmium. The EC WEEE Directive includes a ban oncadmium in electronic products. However, with the shift to lithium batteries, this will primarily be a problemwith older products at end-of-life. Storage media, specifically hard drives, have been manufactured usingprocesses similar to wafer and PWB fabrication and have similar problems with water consumption andplating bath solutions. During the site visit to IBM, San Jose (see Appendix E), it was explained that IBMhad manufactured the disks using nickel and magnesium plated over aluminum. The aluminum in these diskscould not be recycled due to the nickel. Recently, however, IBM switched to glass substrates forperformance reasons (tighter dimensional control). The glass does not require a nickel adhesion layer, whichsimplified the process and consequently has reduced the environmental impact of the manufacturing process.In addition, the glass disks can be recycled by a local glass recycling company. One of the more strikingaspects of this success story was that IBM personnel noted and publicized the positive environmental impactof a technology improvement where the primary focus was not EBM.

Final Assembly

The individual components of a computer and other electronic products are typically housed in a case madeof engineering thermoplastic. It is estimated that more than 3 billion pounds of plastics were consumed bythe U.S. electric and electronic products industry in 1996 (SPI 1997). The Microelectronics and ComputerTechnology Corporation determined that almost 23% (by weight) of a typical desktop computer consists ofengineered thermoplastics (MCC 1996). Since the current trend is to minimize both cost and weight ofelectronics devices, it is expected that the amount of plastic used in these products will only increase.Plastics that dominate the market share in computers, business machines, and other electronic products arehigh impact polystyrene (HIPS), 22.7%; acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS), 20.5%; polycarbonate (PC),19.2%; PC/ABS blends, 11.7%; and polyphenylene oxide blends (PPO), 6.5%; the remaining 19.4% consistsof a variety of other plastic blends (Arola, Allen, and Biddle 1999).

There are some issues with material waste and energy use during the manufacture (extrusion and molding) ofplastic parts for use in electronic products (see polymer section of this chapter). However, the chiefenvironmental concerns for thermoplastics occur at end-of-life. In both Japan and Europe, landfill of solidwaste is being significantly reduced or eliminated and being replaced by recycling and/or incineration. Bothof these options pose challenges for the plastics used in electronic products.

Recycling of many plastic products (such as bottles and film) has been quite successful. However, these aretypically made of a single plastic and do not have other (non-plastic) materials affixed to them. Thecomponents of a single electronic product, however, may use 10 different types of plastics, some of whichmay be painted or coated, and all of which are attached to other parts that are made of plastic (probably of adifferent composition), glass, or metal. This contamination with non-plastic materials and by comminglingof different types of plastics makes recycling technically difficult and therefore economically problematic.

Incineration of the plastics used in electronic products is an issue when brominated flame retardants (BFRs)are used (most commonly in ABS). This is due to the concern that BFRs could be precursors for theformation of carcinogenic dioxins if incinerated at less than optimum temperatures.


End-of-life Management

Electronic products and/or components have been recycled for decades. Historically this has been driven bythe use of significant amounts of precious and base metals (e.g., gold, palladium, copper, and lead) on thechips and boards. Housings were typically constructed of steel, which is also a relatively cost-effectivematerial to recycle. In addition, many of the components were very costly and had lifetime utilities thatmade recovery profitable. In recent years, however, recycling of electronic products has become increasinglyless economically viable. Silicon chips are no longer gold-backed, the volume of precious and base metalsused on PWBs has decreased (in part because the boards themselves are smaller), housings are morecommonly made of engineering thermoplastics than steel, and components are less costly and have muchshorter lifetimes.

At the same time that recycling of electronic materials and components is becoming less economicallyattractive, there is growing pressure to recycle. First, the volume of electronic products being manufacturedis growing at an unprecedented rate and product lifetimes are being shortened, thus accelerating rates ofobsolescence. The National Safety Council issued a report (NSC 1999) that presents data for personalcomputers showing estimated number of computers shipped, average lifetimes, and rates of obsolescence forthe years 1992-2007. This information is shown graphically in Figures 5.11–5.13. Second, in Europe andJapan there is pending legislation that requires electronic equipment to be recycled. The Netherlands hasalready enacted such legislation and has made the producer of the equipment responsible for the cost ofrecycling. MIREC (Appendix C) handles 95% of all end-of-life electronic products. Third, in the U.S.,Massachusetts has banned landfilling of CRT displays because of the lead they contain. Several states,including Minnesota and Florida, are discussing similar actions, and it is anticipated that other states mayfollow. Lastly, the Department of Defense (DOD) and the Department of Energy (DOE) have an interest inproperly handling their end-of-life electronic products either because of sensitive technology and/orinformation or due the hazardous materials that they may contain. In response to this, both agencies havemulti-million dollar projects to develop electronics recycling technologies and establish disposition centers.

While some equipment may be cascaded (high performance equipment sold or transferred by originalowners/users to second owners/users with lower performance demands), the ability to do this is limited. Ithas been found that for a three-year-old personal computer, recovery costs equal the value of the system, andat five years, the system has virtually no value (even with zero recovery costs) (Grenchus, Keene, and Nobs2000). For this reason, there is increasing interest in materials recycling of electronic products.

Recycling of the metals contained within electronic equipment, as stated earlier, is well established. Mostelectronic product recyclers focus on this material recovery operation. Micro Metallics (Appendix E), whichis jointly operated by Noranda and Hewlett-Packard in Roseville, California, is an excellent example of thistype of approach. Material scrap is shredded and separated into steel, plastics, precious metals, and basemetals plus glass. Precious metals and the base metals plus glass mixture are sent to Noranda’s smelter inCanada. Steel and plastics are shipped to other companies that can make use of these materials. Of mostconcern to recyclers, whose profits depend upon the metal content of electronic products, is the decreasingamount of all metals, and precious metals in particular, in electronic products.

Glass recycling is currently not a well-established technology, primarily because of the lead content in theCRT glass. Envirocycle in Pennsylvania has a glass-to-glass recycling operation (CRT glass is re-used asCRT glass) and the DOD’s DEER2 project in Florida has an outlet for leaded glass in glass bricks andceramic tiles for use in X-ray laboratories. However, both of these are somewhat limited markets and theeconomics of these technologies is still being optimized. Most CRT glass is currently sent to smelters, whereit is used as flux, and some is sent overseas where control of lead content is less stringent.


10

20

30

40

50

60

Nu

mbe

r of

PC

s S

hip

ped

(M

)

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010

Year

Fig. 5.11. In the U.S., the number of PCs shipped in 1992 was 11.5 million. In 2005, the number isprojected to be 55.8 million. Data from National Safety Council 1999.

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

5

Ave

rage

Life

spa

n (y

rs)

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010

Year

Fig. 5.12. The average lifetime of a PC in 1992 was 4.5 years. By 2005, the average age is projected to betwo years. Data from National Safety Council 1999.

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Nu

mbe

r o

f P

Cs

ob

sole

te (

M)

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010

Year

Fig. 5.13. The number of PCs that became obsolete in 1997 was 17.5 million. By 2007, the number isprojected to reach 61.3 million. Data from National Safety Council 1999.


The barriers to recycling of engineering thermoplastics have been the subject of ongoing “stakeholderdialogues” at Tufts University. The Massachusetts Chelsea Center for Recycling and EconomicDevelopment provided funding for the first two dialogues in May and June of 1999. The U.S. EnvironmentalProtection Agency Office of Solid Waste provided funding for two additional meetings in December 1999and April 2000. The Department of Energy plans to continue funding this effort beginning in September2000. A number of excellent background reports on the challenges to engineering thermoplastics recyclinghave been issued by The Gordon Institute (TGI) at Tufts University (Dillon 1999a; Dillon and Aqua 2000).The Stakeholder Group is now working to develop collaborative industry solutions (Dillon 1999b; Dillon2000). These reports are available on the TGI Web site (www.gordoninstitute.com).

One of the biggest problems with recycling plastics used in electronic products is the presence of flameretardants. In Japan and Europe, plastics are incinerated rather than recycled, and the presence of brominatedflame retardants (BFRs) raises the concern of dioxin formation during the burning process. As currentlywritten, the WEEE Directive in Europe bans the use of plastics containing selected BFRs. Unfortunately,BFRs are very difficult to detect economically in a recycling process. Since most products sold in the U.S.contain these substances, and plastics cannot effectively be sorted by whether they contain BFRs, it isassumed that most recycled plastic from electronic products, particularly ABS, contains flame retardants.Consequently, many OEMs are reluctant to include recycled plastics in new products that may be sold inEurope.

Regional Trends

Both Japanese and U.S. companies are highly responsive to activities in Europe, particularly the WEEEDirective, with the primary focus being elimination of halogenated flame retardants (typically BFRs) andlead-containing solder. ISO 14000 certification is a key concern for Japanese companies; in Europe there is amoderate effort to complete certification; and in the U.S., it is primarily the international companies that areactively pursuing ISO 14000 activities. While the U.S. leads in developing alternative PWB technologies(such as microvias), the Japanese are most aggressively pursuing these alternatives in commercial products.The motivation is typically reduced size and increased performance for portable consumer products;however, the processes used to manufacture these boards typically use less water, energy, and materialresources. Hitachi, Sony, NEC (Appendix D), and many other companies (IBM, Motorola, etc.) are all usingthis approach in some of their products.

Europe has several countries with take-back legislation in place, but The Netherlands appears to be the onlycountry to date with a well-developed infrastructure for collecting and recycling computers. It is expectedthat other members of the EU will follow suit within the next few years. The industry representatives theWTEC team visited indicated that there is a strong push to be able to document EBM practices in both theirown manufacturing processes as well as from suppliers. Both Philips and Lucent are especially active in thisarea (see site report for TU Delft in Appendix C). Companies such as Siemens (Appendix C) offer “green”products in parallel with conventional, but with a price differential.

U.S. electronics companies are responding to activities in Europe by investigating alternatives to lead solderand BFRs. However, these activities are moving more slowly and with more reluctance than in Japan. Thegeneral feeling is that the benefits of the materials far outweigh the environmental risks. There is moreinterest in disassembly technologies and design for disassembly. There is also a strong emphasis on metricsand supply chain management. Most recycling activities in the U.S. are occurring (or have occurred) aspartnerships with OEMs. Examples of this are Micro Metallics (Noranda and Hewlett-Packard, seeAppendix E), Dell Computer and Resource Concepts Inc. in Dallas, AT&T/Lucent and Butler-MacDonald inIndianapolis, and IBM’s Aurora project in central New York state.

Pb-free Solder

Driven primarily, if not exclusively, by the European Union’s WEEE Directive, there has been a strongincentive for electronic companies worldwide to develop alternatives to tin-lead (Sn-Pb) solder. Thismaterial has been the primary means of attaching electronic components and connectors to PWBs. Sn-Pbsolder is easy to work with, as it is a simple system that has a well-defined eutectic (melting point) at arelatively low temperature. If manufacturing processes are well controlled and products are recycled, there is


little environmental risk to using Sn-Pb solder, as it is easily recovered. However, the concern is that ifcontrol of Pb-containing products is inadequate, these products may end up in landfills and ultimatelycontaminate groundwater.

There is, however, resistance to converting to Pb-free solders. Sn-Pb solders have extremely high reliabilitythrough thermal excursions. Most military and automotive applications require components to be able tosurvive 1000 cycles between +125°C and –65°C. One of the challenges with Pb-free solders is difficulty inachieving this performance. Several companies have released products using Pb-free solders. In at least oneinstance, however, the product was pulled from the market due to failures associated with thermal fatigue.Hitachi, Sony, and Siemens were all quite open in discussing these issues with the panel.

A second problem with Pb-free solders is that they typically have higher melting temperatures and thereforerequire increased process temperatures. Since this is one of the final processes seen by the PWB, all thematerials and components on the board must be able to withstand the increased thermal exposure. Most ofthe laminates currently used to construct PWBs have relatively low glass transition temperatures. Thismeans that alternative, and probably more expensive, substrates will need to be used. The industry alsoneeds capacitors and resistors that can withstand increased temperatures. The Pb-free solder processes arealso more energy intensive.

Sn-Pb solder has only two components and the composition (and therefore eutectic) are easy to control.Most of the Pb-free solders have at least three components and some have as many six. This makes it moredifficult to maintain a uniform composition, thus making process control much more critical and increasingthe likelihood of process scrap. Many of the Pb-free alternatives are difficult to rework (leading to additionalscrap) or disassemble. Some contain elements that are incompatible with recycling processes.

Finally, if a full life-cycle analysis is done, it is unclear that Pb-free solders are actually moreenvironmentally friendly (Turbini et al. 2000). If material availability, impacts of extraction, increasedprocessing difficulties, and end-of-life issues are accounted for, Sn-Pb solder may actually be a better choice.Ultimately the best solution may be completely new attachment technologies that do not use solder, such asadhesive flip chip.

Flame Retardants

The use of flame retardants may be one of the most unclear and confounding environmental concernsaffecting electronic products. Since many polymers are highly flammable and their presence in electronicsprovides a ready source of heat and/or energy, there is a very real concern that flame retardants of some typebe incorporated into the housings (thermoplastics) and printed wiring boards (thermo-sets) used in electronicequipment. According to one source, flame retardants saved over 900 lives in 1991 (Squires 2000).Historically, electronic components have used halogenated flame retardants, organic compounds containingchlorine or bromine. Chlorinated flame retardants are well known to have detrimental effects on both healthand the environment. While these compounds have been replaced with brominated flame retardants (BFRs),which are believed to be much safer, the legacy of halogenated flame retardants in general continues tolinger. Even if the focus is limited to BFRs, there is confusion as to whether all BFRs or only certain ones(many of which are no longer used in electronics) should be considered. There are numerous commercialBFRs, each with unique chemical, physical, and toxicological properties.

The European WEEE Directive addresses several concerns with the use of flame retardants. The primaryones are (1) formation of dioxins and furans during incineration or recycling, and (2) persistence andbioaccumulation. According to the WEEE draft from June 13, 2000, copper (which is used to form theelectrical interconnects in PWBs) “works like a catalyst, thereby increasing the risk of formation of dioxinswhen flame retardants are incinerated. This is of particular concern as the incineration of brominated flameretardants at a low temperature (600-800°C) may lead to the generation of extremely toxic polybrominateddisbenso dioxins (PBDDs) and polybrominated disbenso furans (PBDFs).” Representatives within theelectronics industry, however, believe that this is misleading, in that when properly maintained and operated,incinerators are never used at such low temperatures. The draft directive also expresses concern that dioxinsand furans may form during recycling (smelting) of metals and extrusion of recovered plastics associated


with waste electronics. In addition to questions regarding actual temperatures of operation, it is unclearwhether or not the BFRs currently in use in electronic products exhibit these particular phenomena.

The WEEE Directive calls for two specific BFRs, polybrominated biphenyls (PBBs) and polybrominateddiphenyl ethers (PBDEs), to be phased out by January 1, 2008. Most of the evidence cited within thedirective as to the environmental and health issues associated with BFRs address only these two substances.However, these compounds are rarely if ever used and most are no longer manufactured. Even within thedirective it is noted that PBBs and PBDEs account for only 1% and 9%, respectively, of the flame retardantsfound in waste electronics (presumably in older equipment).

There are two primary families of BFRs currently in use. The first is polybrominated diphenyl oxides(PBDPO), which include DBDPO (decabromodiphenyl oxide), OBDPO (octabromodiphenyl oxide), andPeBDPO (pentabromodiphenyl oxide). In the electronics industry, DBDPO is the dominant PBDPO BFRand is used primarily in computer housings. The second family of BFRs is the phenolics, which includesTBBPA (tetrabromo-bisphenol A). TBBPA (also referred to as TBBA) is used primarily for printed wiringboards. There continues to be debate as to whether these compounds are actually an environmental problem.Initial studies suggest that they do not have any negative persistence or bioaccumulation characteristics(Hardy 2000; Hedemalm et al. 2000). In addition, substitutes or alternatively complete elimination of flameretardants altogether may not actually be beneficial to the environment (Simonson and Stripple 2000;Segerberg et al. 2000).

Despite the debate about whether or not there are sufficient data to support the environmental and healthconcerns surrounding use of the BFRs currently in use, there is a significant effort within the electronicscommunity to find substitutes, particularly in Japan and Europe. Sony is investigating phosphate esters andnitrite flame deterrents and plans to begin mass production of halogen-free double-sided CEM3, double-sidedFR4, 4-layer epoxy-glass plated-through-hole (PTH), and 8-layer blind-via (BVH) boards. In contrast, theU.S. based trade association, IPC, which represents manufacturers of printed wiring boards (PWBs), has atask force on flame retardants. The task force takes the position that there are no obvious alternative flameretardants for BFRs used with the epoxy-based resins (thermo-sets) from which PWBs are constructed.However, members of this task force are beginning to investigate possible solutions with a focus on technicalperformance and cost. One approach is to use large organic aromatic molecules or nitrogen containingcompounds that do not burn well. According to one of the task force members, who works for DuPont’siTechnologies (Appendix E), these technologies can be applied to polyimides (a very small portion of thePWB market), but not all other laminate materials. Another option for eliminating BFRs is to design PWBssuch that they do not require any flame retardants (Bergendahl 2000). This includes using materials with lowrates of combustion and high glass transition temperatures. In addition, fuses that minimize operatingtemperatures and use of materials that conduct heat well may also reduce the need for flame retardants.

The exterior cases for electronic products are constructed of thermoplastics. The most common of these arePC/ABS and ABS, which are extremely flammable. ABS is commonly used because of low cost and goodperformance (mechanical properties); however, it is one of the most flammable of the engineeringthermoplastics. There are alternatives to BFRs for thermoplastics, including the choice of the specific plasticused. Among the flame retardants being explored for thermoplastics are inorganic fillers such as MgO andnanocomposites (extremely fine alumino-silicate clay). However, these inorganic fillers may require veryhigh loadings that can have significant consequences on mechanical strength and electrical properties andtherefore cannot be used in all applications. Another alternative is red phosphorus, but it is not clear that thisis a more environmentally friendly solution.

Conclusions

The electronics industry is a complex one, with many different “sub-industries” that contribute thecomponents that make up a final electronic product. There have been significant efforts in the area ofenvironmentally benign manufacturing, especially for wafer and printed wiring board fabrication, but due tothe ever-changing nature of the industry and its immense complexity, it continues to have environmentalissues associated with it. It is also highly competitive and regionally segmented, making it at times difficultto differentiate between environmental and market share initiatives. The current areas of greatest concern areproduct take-back and recycling, Pb-free solders, and flame retardants (see the DuPont-RTP site report).


ENERGY (T. PIWONKA)

Summary

The primary source of energy for most of the world today is the energy released when carbon is combinedwith oxygen. This reaction produces carbon dioxide (CO2) that is usually vented to the atmosphere, acondition that has been linked to global warming. In addition, carbon combustion releases organicdecomposition products formed from the presence of other elements, such as sulfur, nitrogen and chlorine incarbon-containing fuels; many of these have been shown to be hazardous to biosystems. This discussion willfocus on the methods being explored to reduce the production of carbon dioxide and the current status ofalternative energy sources.

Introduction

Manufacturing requires energy. And, since some forms of energy production generate pollutants andgreenhouse gases, especially carbon dioxide, the choice of energy source has important implications indesigning an environmentally benign manufacturing process.

The ideal energy source should be safe, non-polluting, portable, reliably available in all climates andlocations, inexpensive and of high quality. Safe means that opportunities to release the energy uncontrollably,as in an unwanted explosion, are nearly non-existent. Non-polluting means that greenhouse gases, pollutantsand radioactivity should not be released as a by-product of energy generation. Portable means that the sourcecan power transportation equipment, such as motor vehicles aircraft and ships, without regard to theirposition relative to a primary power generation source. Reliably available means that it must not beinterrupted by changes in the weather, or require that people live in an unattractive part of the world to use it.High quality means that variations in power output are minimized. And it should be sufficiently inexpensivethat it is within the economic reach of all.

Unfortunately, no energy source meets all of these criteria; all have some drawbacks. To a large extent, thequestion of producing environmentally benign products in an environmentally benign way depends on thechoice of energy source used by the products and in their manufacture. Note, however, that many products,such as automobiles and aircraft, consume far more energy in use than in their manufacture.

Global Warming

Global warming is a problem of increasing concern worldwide. Mean temperatures have been rising at a slowbut steady rate in the ocean and in the atmosphere since the middle of the last century (Dunn 2000). The risein global temperatures tracks the increase in the amount of fossil fuels burned by humankind over the last150 years very closely, leading to the conclusion that global warming is very probably caused by humanactivities. While the increase in global temperatures is not debatable, it is not established beyond all doubtthat people are the cause of global warming, as the earth has gone through heating and cooling cycles in thepast before humankind could influence these cycles. Nevertheless, the parallel increase in combustion ofcarbon-based fuels and global warming in the last 150 years is highly suggestive of a cause and effectrelationship, certainly to the extent that a prudent engineer could assume that a direct relationship is probable.

Since global warming can be traced to the amount of carbon dioxide in the upper atmosphere, and carbondioxide is formed from the combustion of organic matter which is burned in increasingly large amounts toheat and move people and to process materials, the implications could be serious. As the atmosphere warms,polar ice caps and glaciers melt, increasing the volume of water in the oceans. In turn, the ocean level rises,flooding low-lying coastal areas. Temperate growing areas shift towards the poles and away from theequator, disrupting civilization patterns that have endured for centuries. Precipitation patterns change, and theeffect on ocean currents such as the Gulf Stream are not clear. In addition, there is concern about thepossibility of a “runaway greenhouse effect” (Benarde 1992) in which the temperature of the earth increasesvery quickly and cannot be reversed, leading to conditions similar to those on Venus.


In addition to carbon dioxide, other gases, such as methane, also are greenhouse gases. Moreover, otherhydrocarbon gases produced when organic matter such as petroleum products, wood, or coal is burned havebeen shown to cause disease and degrade the environment.

It has been argued that if the only effect of global warming is to move temperate zones closer to the poles,and perhaps inundate some low-lying coastal areas, the consequences are not really that serious. It is assumedthat the consequences of global warming events would take an economic toll on society, in the form ofmigrations of people from seacoasts and areas of the world that become less desirable than they are todaybecause of warming climates, or changes in precipitation. It is not known, however, what the long-term effectof global warming will actually be (Kerr 2000), or how adaptable people might be in re-locating fromaffected areas of the planet.

The concern over global warming varies by country. Japan takes the threat very seriously, and Japanese adson television and in subways sell the environmental advantages of one product over another. One Japanesecompany, Horiba, is a world leader in the development of analyzers that track the generation of greenhousegases and other air pollutants. In Kyoto a sign in a large public square announces the hourly concentration ofcarbon dioxide in the local atmosphere. Toyota includes in its annual environmental report the number oftons of CO2 its engineering and operations have saved annually; one example is controlling the just-in-timetruck shipments of parts from its suppliers to its assembly plants and shipments of finished products and partsto its dealers (Toyota 1999). (Though note that “just-in-time” delivery of parts from suppliers to assemblyplants actually increases CO2 by requiring many small truckloads of parts hourly, instead of a few largetrainloads of parts weekly.)

European automobile companies are careful to publicize their efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions toan extent rare in the United States (though recent statements by the management of Ford Motor Company arechanging this). Scandinavian Airlines System recently spent two pages in its in-flight magazine to detail whatit is doing to use less fuel.

The Carbon Economy

The basic source of energy for human civilization has been the combustion of carbon in organic materialssuch as wood or fossil fuels. Archeologists report that ancient cities moved when local sources of wood weredepleted. Less than 300 years ago, the production of cast iron nearly denuded England of its forests; onlywhen coke (coke is coal that has been heated to drive off volatile constituents, thus increasing its carboncontent) was developed as an alternate metallurgical fuel did the industrial revolution really mature.

The carbon economy has advantages. Carbon is easily portable. In solid form, coal has been used to powersteam engines in ships and locomotives since the invention of the steam engine. Refined into liquid fuels, thethermal energy of the fuel is increased, and the fuel is easily dispensed and carried in transportationequipment and used for space heating.

But the carbon economy also has drawbacks. The supplies of carbon in forms that can be converted to energyare limited, and not necessarily located near users. Combustion of carbon fuels produces by-products that arenot necessarily benign to life. More efficient methods of converting carbon to energy depend on refinementsin component manufacturing techniques, as Kubota representatives pointed out in a discussion of newenvironmental requirements for diesel engines. Conversion efficiencies improve with increasing combustiontemperatures, and therefore are limited by the properties (melting point and softening temperatures) of thematerials used to confine the combustion reaction. As an example, the temperature of the combustion gasesentering the turbine section of current gas turbine engines is above the melting point of the alloys used in theturbine section—only sophisticated cooling schemes allow the engine to operate without melting. And, eventhe most efficient combustion of carbon produces carbon dioxide, the major greenhouse gas.

There have been examples of highly efficient use of the energy generated from fossil fuels to minimizeemissions. Recovery of waste heat from industrial processes is widespread. In Japan there are seriousattempts to recover waste heat from air and water that is close to ambient temperatures. Combined cycle gasturbines are increasing as a source of commercial electric power. Such installations achieve energyefficiencies of better than 50%. It is fairly common for large industrial installations, such as steel plants, to


generate their own energy on-site and make the excess available to a nearby power grid, as Corus Hollanddoes. Eco-industrial parks such as Kalundborg in Denmark have provided a model for future industrial parks.However, these efforts merely dent the overall impact of the carbon economy on the environment.

Nevertheless, the carbon economy is thoroughly entrenched in society, for historical as well as technologicalreasons. An extensive commercial economy is based on it, and converting it to one based on another energysource would be difficult and expensive. The question of whether—or when—such a conversion will bemade depends on how serious the disruption of society by global warming will be, a question that cannot beanswered today.

Alternatives to the Carbon Economy

Because of concern about emissions from carbon-based fuels, a number of alternatives have been proposedfor industrial systems and their products to minimize the generation of carbon dioxide, or avoid it altogether.Some of these ideas are new, some are not, but all are under active consideration today.

Hybrid and All-Electric Engines

In hybrid vehicle engines, fossil fuels provide the driving power during acceleration. Excess power isdelivered to a secondary source, such as a battery or a flywheel. Braking energy is also delivered to a batteryor flywheel. The secondary energy source is then used when the vehicle is in motion. Gasoline mileageranges from 45 to 70 miles per gallon. Honda and Toyota now offer small cars with this engine system inJapan and the United States. Both Ford and General Motors have promised hybrid vehicles (including sportutility vehicles) by the 2005 model year. Buyer acceptance has not yet been assessed, but there is hope thatthese vehicles will sell satisfactorily, especially in cities.

All electric vehicles (or “zero-emission” vehicles) have been offered for sale or lease in California for anumber of years. Their acceptance by consumers has been disappointing. Despite a state mandate that 5% ofcars sold in California are to be zero-emission vehicles, California drivers have shown little interest in them.Their performance is poorer than gasoline and diesel-powered cars, recharging batteries is inconvenient, andtheir range between recharges is believed to be insufficient by most drivers. (Some environmentalistsconsider these arguments to be excuses by automobile companies to postpone eliminating greenhouse gasgeneration from their products.) There is also the question of whether zero-emission vehicles actually reduceglobal warming, since the electricity that powers them must be generated, and then transmitted from thegenerating plant to the recharging station, which involves transmission losses. Clearly, if the electrical energyis generated by a fossil fuel-burning power station, substantial amounts of greenhouse gases will begenerated; if it is generated by solar or wind energy, electric vehicles will actually be pollution-free.

Alternative Fuel Sources and Fuel Cells

Liquid Natural Gas. One suggestion has been to use liquid natural gas (LNG) instead of gasoline or dieselfuel for internal combustion or gas turbine engines. LNG yields only carbon dioxide on combustion (no NOxor SOx), and has a greater energy content per pound than diesel fuel. A number of commercial fleets of carsand small trucks have been successfully converted to natural gas, and some municipal transit systems havealso been converted. LNG occupies more space for the same amount of energy than liquid fossil fuels, thuslimiting its use where large amounts of fuel must be carried in limited space, as on ships or in aircraft.Although there is an infrastructure for the nationwide distribution of LNG, consumers have shown littleinterest in LNG automobiles. Nevertheless, because LNG has a lower proportion of carbon to hydrogen(compared with other fossil fuels), its use in transportation systems can reduce the production of greenhousegases; and it is receiving attention from owners of barges, buses, and light truck fleets as a way of reducinggreenhouse gases.

Biomass and “Decarbonized” Fossil Fuel. Biomass conversion has been proposed as a way to easedependence on fossil fuels. However, growing biomass requires land that might otherwise be used for food. Ithas been proposed that various biofuels could be grown on otherwise non-productive ground. Whether thiswould be the best use of steadily diminishing water resources and natural ecosystems is questionable,especially as increasing world population will require that increasing amounts of land be used for food crops.


Biomass needs to be processed and the product distilled. While the distilled product adds less to globalwarming, it does not eliminate it during combustion or use in a fuel cell.

“Decarbonized” fossil fuels are treated so that the carbon dioxide created on combustion is sequestered byinjecting it into the ocean or reacting with materials to create stable carbonates (primarily calcium carbonate).Experimental development of this technique is still in its early stages, and it is premature to predict theimpact of this technology.

Fuel Cells. Fuel cells, which make use of the energy released when hydrogen and oxygen combine, areunder intense study all over the world. If pure hydrogen is used as a fuel, these engines release only water asa combustion product, so do not contribute to global warming. All major automobile companies aredeveloping fuel cells. General Motors reports that its seventh generation fuel cell produces 75 hp, and comesrapidly to full power in cold weather. More generations of fuel cells are under development, with the majorfocus being to reduce acquisition costs. For maximum efficiency, automotive fuel cells run on pure liquidhydrogen; Ford and Toyota have addressed the problem of liquid hydrogen supply infrastructure bydeveloping prototype hydrogen-dispensing “gas” stations.

Because hydrogen is not widely available as a fuel, most fuel cells today use a small chemical converter toextract hydrogen from conventional fossil fuels or methane, thus limiting their efficiency and forming at leastsome carbon dioxide. Pure hydrogen would be an ideal fuel, but the most common method of obtaining purehydrogen, electrolysis of water, uses large quantities of energy, which, if the energy is produced usingconventional fossil fuels, might defeat the purpose of the technology. In addition, keeping hydrogen liquidduring transportation and storage requires energy for refrigeration. There is also a popular impression thathydrogen is inherently unsafe and liable to explode (as in the Hindenburg disaster), although it is actuallysafer than gasoline. However, hydrogen can present unique storage and transport problems due to theextremely small size of H2 molecules: H2 tends to leak out of conventional metal pipelines and storage tanks.Hydride or carbon nanotube storage may provide solutions.

Fuel cells can be designed to operate at high or low temperature. The high temperature fuel cells (solid oxidefuel cells), though more powerful, have up to now required heat resistant alloys, and, when operated on fossilfuels such as natural gas, tended to foul from carbon build-up at the electrodes. However, new developmentsduring the last six months (Service 2000) suggest that these more powerful fuel cells, running on fossil fuels,are capable of being made at costs that make them attractive to consumers. In one estimate, fuel cells thatcould provide power for a small manufacturing plant could be available commercially within a decade. Suchcells would be desirable, since the development of a national infrastructure to provide hydrogen for fuel cellsis not currently considered to be likely within the decade.

Much fuel cell development today is focused on power plants for transportation, such as cars, small trucks, orbusses. All of the automotive companies visited mentioned having a fuel cell project, though none wasanxious to share its findings with us. More powerful cells serve as power sources for industrial plants, and forhomes, eliminating transmission losses and the service interruptions that can occur when storms knock downpower lines, and it is this application that is expected to reach commercialization first. Note that the use offuel cells instead of internal combustion engines would significantly impact manufacturing, since muchfoundry and machining output today is centered on producing components for internal combustion engines.The impact of removing a major market for metal manufacturing would be expected to reduce emissions thatresult from these processes.

Water, Solar and Wind Power

Solar power, wind power and water power are potential “free” energy sources. Water power has fallen fromfavor recently as it is found that dams constructed to produce power interfere with fish reproduction in somespecies (notably salmon), and disrupt local populations and ecosystems (and occasionally archeological sites,such as in Turkey) when lakes are formed behind the dams. In addition, many sources of water power are farfrom population centers, requiring transmission lines with their attendant transmission losses. The outlook forwater power is that it will decrease over time as a percentage of total power generated worldwide.


Solar power continues to receive attention as the cost of solar cells continues to decline (Flavin 2000a). Solarpowered automobiles have successfully crossed the country, and solar power is used in sunny climates as anauxiliary power source for both private homes and commercial buildings. Solar powered road signs are usedin many countries. DaimlerChrysler has installed solar panels in two of its plants in Germany, and currentlygenerates electricity for its own usage. Another installation in Europe is an office building that uses solarpower transmitted by fiber optics to light individual offices.

Production of photovoltaic (PV) cells for solar power generation has grown substantially in the last ten years.Japan currently leads the rest of the world in PV cell production, helped by the Japanese government’ssubsidy of solar power heating systems for residences. Some European governments are also encouragingtheir producers by making it easy for homeowners to install solar power in their homes. The cost of solarpower modules continues to decrease (currently about $3500/kW), but is not yet sufficiently low to make thisform of energy competitive in most applications where power is available from a conventional power grid. Acarpet plant in the United States has installed a solar powered loom to demonstrate the feasibility of usingsolar power in industrial production; it has a 65 year pay-back period.

Solar power as an industrial or domestic power source has not had the acceptance in the United States thatwas initially hoped for. Often the best locations for solar power generation (deserts) are unattractive to peopleas a location for homes and businesses. Solar power also requires a method to store the power for use at nightor during inclement weather. It is expected to play an increasing role as an auxiliary source of power.

Technology for wind power has improved dramatically in the last two decades; indeed, it is today the world’sfastest-growing source of power (Flavin 2000b). Over $3 billion worth of wind generation equipment wasinstalled in 1999, and the cost of wind power is nearing the cost of that generated by new fossil fuel plants.As in the case of solar power, however, wind power is generated only in certain geographical areas. Waysmust be found to store it when the wind does not blow, and often it must be transmitted over substantialdistances (with attendant losses) to customers. Wind power, like solar power, is an important adjunct to otherpower generation methods, and a strong case can be made for continued development of this technology.

Nuclear Power

Nuclear power offers abundant clean energy. Unfortunately, it is currently a forbidden solution to the energyproblem. Memories of Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, and, in Japan the release of nuclear material shortlybefore the WTEC panel visited Japan, color any discussion of nuclear power as a viable method of obtainingenergy. This is in spite of the record of France, which generates 85% of its power from nuclear sources, andof the United States, which generates nearly 20% of its power in nuclear plants and has had no recurrence ofthe Three Mile Island incident. (As for Chernobyl, its reactor design was unacceptable anywhere except inthe Soviet Union. However, since the Russian Republic has more such reactors operating, there remains thechance that another incident could occur.)

As well as generating electricity, nuclear power could produce large quantities of liquid hydrogen for fuelcells without forming greenhouse gases. Used as a power supply for ships, it could permit high speed oceantransport of industrial goods and components for assembly, needed for just-in-time manufacturing, since thevolume of space occupied by the fuel supply is small in comparison to that required for liquid petroleum fuel.(Note, however, that many countries will not allow nuclear-powered ships in their waters.) A recent study(Sailor et al. 2000) strongly suggests that nuclear power should be reassessed in view of the threat of globalwarming and advances in nuclear power technology.

Even though total installed nuclear generating capability increased during the last year (Lenssen 2000), thefuture of nuclear power in Europe and the United States is not bright. Although there have been significantimprovements in the design, control and operation of nuclear power plants in the last 30 years, the public isconvinced that they are more hazardous than conventional power plants. There is controversy over thesequestering and storage of spent nuclear fuel, much of it focused on the lack of trust of those who wouldhave responsibility for it. It seems probable that it will take a major ecological or economic dislocationresulting from the use of fossil fuels to persuade the public to reexamine nuclear power.


Other Approaches

Deregulation. The United States is currently in the process of deregulating the electric power industry. Whatwe used to think of as monolithic power companies that generated, distributed, and then sold power atwholesale rates (to industry) or retail rates (to small shop owners and homeowners), is in the process ofbreaking up into companies that will specialize in generation, transmission, or sales of power.

The consequences of this have yet to be worked out. Some retail sales companies offer their customers thechoice of conventionally generated power, or, at a somewhat higher rate, “green” power. Given choicesbetween differing sources of power, customers are able to choose among competing methods, weighing cost,reliability and environmental load. However, the high temperatures experienced in southern California (oneof the first states to deregulate power) during the summer of 2000 caused increases in the price of electricpower that infuriated citizens and led some people to question the wisdom of deregulation. Rolling blackoutsin the winter of 2000-2001 further underscored these concerns.

“Micropower” Plants. One possibility is for customers to generate their own power, using small powerplants sited at the point of use (Dunn and Flavin 2000). A number of firms now offer small power plants (upto 10 megawatts) that can be installed without using step-up and step-down high voltage transformers incommercial or residential complexes for the use of only those connected to it. Such installations could alsoprovide power for factories. For individual homeowners, fuel cells running on LNG or natural gas would beable to provide the power needed, without involving a conventional power company. These small powersources typically produce fewer emissions than large power plants, because they can be sized for the mostefficient operation and tuned to their expected load. Transmission losses are eliminated, downed power linesin storms are no longer a problem, and reliability and quality of power are increased. Reliability and powerquality are of increasing importance in the era of computers, where an interruption or power spike can causea system to crash. A number of companies are looking very closely at the potential for these “micropower”plants, which may assume a greater role as energy sources in the future.

Move Manufacturing Offshore. A scenario often suggested is that of moving all manufacturing offshore tocountries with emerging economies. Indeed, many of these countries actively court such moves, including thepollution they bring, as they provide jobs, promote increased foreign trade, and boost economic developmentof these countries. However, exporting manufacturing operations does not reduce their global environmentalimpact, and thus does not provide a fundamental solution to the problem of decreasing the generation ofgreenhouse gases.

Energy Conservation. Energy conservation is an ongoing effort around the world, and was not specificallystudied by the panel. Conservation efforts increase when the price of energy increases, and often stagnatewhen energy costs are decreasing or stable. There are different levels of energy conservation in differentparts of the world. For instance, the roofs of the Daimler headquarters in Stuttgart have been planted withgrass, which serves as an insulator, though the roof of the Chrysler headquarters has not.

At a number of the foreign sites visited, WTEC panel members heard criticism of the American use ofenergy, which some foreign company representatives considered to be wasteful, especially in regard to ourautomobiles. However, it is necessary to acknowledge—as DaimlerChrysler’s chief environmental officerDr. Werner Pollmann has done (Pollman 1999)—that differences in automobile fuel consumption betweenthe United States and Europe/Japan are to a large extent the result of the vast distances that many Americanstravel each day. Even so, it is worth noting that during the oil crisis of the 1970s, Americans substantiallyreduced their need for oil through conservation methods, not technology.

Hydrogen Economy

One possibility—that some people have argued should be pursued vigorously—is the conversion of ourcarbon economy to a hydrogen economy. The opportunities to eliminate greenhouse gases through the use offuel cells in cars and in micropower systems is simply too great to ignore. This requires that a source ofliquid hydrogen be found. Hydrogen can be produced by electrolysis of water, a process that requiressubstantial quantities of electric power. Obviously, obtaining that power from fossil fuels defeats the purpose


of converting to a hydrogen economy. Alternative power sources, if sufficient, would have to be usedinstead.

One alternative that has been suggested is obtaining hydrogen as a result of chemical reactions, or bybiosynthesis. The biosynthesis route needs to be encouraged, and research into this process supported.However, even with a mature, economical, environmentally benign method for producing hydrogen, a barrierwill exist in establishing the distribution infrastructure around the world. This is a matter for consideration byenergy companies and governments. Note that some governments, particularly those of oil and natural gas-producing countries, can be expected to be less than enthusiastic about the development of hydrogen as asubstitute fuel.

Summary

The choices facing society regarding energy sources for the future are not reassuring. Continued use of thetraditional source of energy, carbon, may cause severe societal dislocations in the next century as a result ofglobal warming. Various forms of “free” energy are not distributed equally to all in the world. It is clear thatmore education is required on the consequences of our attitudes toward energy sources—especially nuclearpower—and on the consequences of our choices.

If it is accepted by society that burning carbon contributes significantly to global warming, and that thesocietal dislocations implied in global warming are unacceptable, then conversion from a carbon energyeconomy to a non-carbon energy economy is required. Given the appetite for energy in the world (includingemerging economies), it seems naive to believe that wind, water and solar power alone will be able to satisfythe world’s energy needs. The contribution of nuclear power to the energy requirements of the world needs tobe reassessed, and steps taken to educate the public on the issues and facts about modern forms of nuclearpower.

REFERENCES

AIChE (American Institute of Chemical Engineers). 1998. Vision 2020: Separations Roadmap, Center for WasteReduction Technologies.

Allen, D.T. 1995. Clean Chemical Manufacturing Technologies: Current Practices and Long Term R & D Priorities.Report submitted to the U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment.

Altschuller, A. 1997. Automobile Recycling Alternatives: Why Not?--A Look at the Possibilities for Greener CarRecycling. Neighborhood Planning for Community Revitalization (NPCR): Center for Urban and Regional Affairs.University of Minnesota. http://freenet.msp.mn.us/org/npcr/reports/npcr1057/npcr1057.html.

Alvord, K. 2000. Divorce Your Car. New Society Publishers: Gabriola Island, Canada.

ARC. 1997. Proceedings of Society of Plastic Engineers 4th Annual Recycling Conference (ARC’97)

Arola, D.F., L.E. Allen, and M.B. Biddle. 1999. Evaluation of mechanical recycling options for electronic equipment.Proc. IEEE, International Symposium on Electronics and the Environment, pp. 187-191.

Ashby, M.F. 1992. Materials Selection in Mechanical Design, Pergamon Press.

Benarde, M.A. 1992. Global Warming…Global Warning. John Wiley & Sons. p. 51.

Bergendahl, C.G. 2000. Electronics goes halogen-free: international driving forces and the availability and potential ofhalogen-free alternatives. Proc. IEEE, International Symposium on Electronics and the Environment, pp. 54-58.

Burke, M. 2000. Assessing the environmental health of Europe. Environ. Sci. Technol. Vol. 34/ 3. pp. 76a-80a.

CARS of Maryland. 2000. Web site, http://www.carsofmd.com/.

Cobas-Flores, E., A. Bustani, P Mackay, B. Ramirez, S. Yester, J. Sullivan, and R. Williams. 1998. “An analysis ofvehicle end-of-life in the United States.” SAE Paper #982213.

Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy (ENVI). 2000. Proposal for a Directive of theEuropean Parliament and of the Council on Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/en/com/dat/2000/en_500PC0347_01.html) and Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of theCouncil on the restriction of the use of certain hazardous substances in electrical and electronic equipment


(http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/en/com/dat/2000/en_500PC0347_02.html). Committee on the Environment, PublicHealth and Consumer Policy. European Parliament (June 13, 2000).

Cselle, T., and A. Baramani. 1995. Today's applications and future coatings for drills and rotating cutting tools. Surfaceand Coating Technology. 76-77. pp. 712-718.

DaimlerChrysler 2000. Web site, http://www.daimlerchrysler.com/.

Darnay, A. (ed). 1998. Manufacturing USA. Industry Analyses, Statistics & Leading Cos. 6th ed. Gale Publishers.

DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency). 1996. DARPA Environmentally Conscious ElectronicManufacturing Program Review Proceedings. Albuquerque, NM, June 4 & 5.

Dillon, P.S. 1999a. Recycling infrastructure for engineering thermoplastics: a supply chain analyis. Proc. IEEE,International Symposium on Electronics and the Environment, pp. 198-203.

Dillon, P.S. 1999b. Meeting Summary: 3rd Stakeholder Dialogue on Recycling Engineering Thermoplastics. December9. The Gordon Institute at Tufts University. Available online atwww.gordoninstitute.com.

Dillon, P.S. 2000. Meeting Summary: 4th Stakeholder Dialogue on Recycling Engineering Thermoplastics. April 4. TheGordon Institute at Tufts University. Available online atwww.gordoninstitute.com.

Dillon, P.S. and E.N. Aqua. 2000. Recycling Market Development for Engineering Thermoplastics from Used ElectronicEquipment: Summary Report of the Stakeholder Dialogue Meetings, Technical Report #21, Chelsea Center forRecycling and Economic Development. March. Available online at www.chelseacenter.org.

DOE (Department of Energy). 1991. Industrial Waste Reduction Program: Program Plan. Office of IndustrialTechnologies.

DOE (Department of Energy). 2000. Web site, http://www.doe.gov/.

Dunn, S. 2000. Global temperature drops. Vital Signs 2000. p. 64.

Dunn, S. and C. Flavin. 2000. Sizing up micropower. State of the World 2000. p. 14.

EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). 1995. Printed Wiring Board Industry and Use Cluster Profile, EPA Report #744-R-95-005, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Design for the Environment Program.

EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). 1997. Implementing Cleaner Technologies in the Printed Wiring BoardIndustry: Making Holes Conductive, EPA Report # 744-R-97-001, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Designfor the Environment Program.

EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). 1998a. TRI On-site and Off-site Releases by Industries (seewww.epa.gov/tri/tri98/data/datasum.htm)

EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). 1998b. Computer Display Industry and Technology Profile, EPA Report #744-R-98-005, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Design for the Environment Program.

EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). 2000a. EPA Office of Compliance Sector Notebook Project: Profile of theMetal Casting Industry. EPA/310-R-97-004, 1997.

EPA. 2000b. Web site, http://www.epa.gov/.

Flavin, C. 2000a. Solar power market jumps. Vital Signs 2000. p. 58.

Flavin, C. 2000b. Wind Power Booms. Vital Signs 2000. p. 56.

Ford (Ford Motor Company). 2000. Web site, http://www.ford.com/.

Gerngross, T.U. and S.C. Slater. 2000. How green are green plastics? Scientific American. August. pp. 37 –41.

GM (General Motors). 2000. Web site, http://www.gm.com/.

Graedel, T.E., and B.R. Allenby. 1998. Industrial Ecology and the Automobile. Prentice Hall: Upper Saddle River,New Jersey.

Grenchus, E., R. Keene, and C. Nobs. 2000. Composition and value of returned consumer and industrial technologyequipment. Proc. IEEE, International Symposium on Electronics and the Environment, pp. 324-329.

Grossmann, G. 2000. Lead-free soldering, a state of the art. Proc. Electronics Goes Green 2000+, Berlin, pp. 61-66.

Hands, D., M. Sheehan, B. Wong, and H. Lick. 1996. Comparison of metalworking fluid mist exposures from machiningwith different levels of machine enclosure. American Industrial Hygiene Association Journal. Vol. 57/12.pp. 1173-1178.


Hardy, M.L. 2000. “Toxicology of Commercial PBDPOs and TBBPA.” Presented at IPC Printed Circuits Expo, April 5.

Hedemalm, P., A. Eklund, R. Bloom, J. Haggstrom. 2000. Brominated flame retardants–an overview of toxicology andindustrial aspects. Proc. IEEE, International Symposium on Electronics and the Environment, pp. 203-208.

Heitbrink, W.A., J.B. D’Arcy, and J.M. Yacher. 2000. Mist generation at a machining center. American IndustrialHygiene Association Journal. Vol. 61.

Holden, H. 1996. Special Construction Printed Wiring Boards. Printed Circuits Handbook, 4th ed., New York: McGraw-Hill. pp. 4.1-4.8.

Honda (American Honda Motor Company, Inc.). 2000. Web site, http://www.honda.com/.

IndustryWeek.com. 1998. Spectra Code Inc. Dec. 21. (see www.industryweek.com)

IndustryWeek.com. 2000. “All Ears” by Tim Stevens, Sept. 4.

Johnson, H. 1995. Green Plans: Greenprints for Sustainability. University of Nebraska Press.

Kajiwara, T. 2000. Development of recycling technology for end-of-life vehicles. Proceedings of the 2000 Japan-USASymposium on Flexible Automation. July.

Kerr, R. A. 2000. Dueling models: future of U.S. climate uncertain. Science. vol. 288. no. 5474 (23 June ). p. 2113.

Klee, H. 1992. Executive Summary of the AMOCO/EPA Pollution Prevention Project. Copies available throughAmerican Petroleum Institute, Washington, D.C.

Lenssen, N. 2000. Nuclear power rises slightly. Vital Signs 2000. p. 54.

Lott, J.W., R.K. Kraus, and C.F. Murphy. 1997. High-density laminate substrates using a non-subtractive manufacturingprocess. International Journal of Microcircuits and Electronic Packaging, Vol. 20, No. 3, pp. 268-273.

Lott, J.W., S. Quindlen, and D. Vaughan. 1997. Environmentally conscious materials as part of DuPont electronicmaterials technology roadmap. Proc. IEEE International Symposium on Electronics and the Environment, pp. 234-239.

Lutz, A. 1999. "Beitrag zur Entwicklung innovativer Fertigungstechniken für die Verarbeitung thermoplastischerFaserverbundwerkstoffe." Ph.D. Thesis, IVW, U. Kaiserslauten, Germany.

MacLean, H.L., and L.B. Lave. 2000. Environmental implications of alternative-fueled automobiles: air quality andgreenhouse gas tradeoffs. Environmental Science & Technology. Vol. 34/2. pp. 225-231.

Marano, R.S., R.L. Messick, J.M. Smolinski, and L. Toth. 1995. “Polymer additives as mist suppressants inmetalworking fluids, Part 1: Laboratory and Plant Studies—Straight Mineral Oil Fluids.” SAE Paper #950245.

Materials Progress. 2000. Aluminum added to scrap steel makes Sn, Cu harmless. vol. 158, no. 1 (August), p. 14.

Mattus, J., P. Sheng et al. 1997. A Framework for Analyzing Energy Efficient Injection Molding Die Design. CSM Report#96-09, Engineering Systems Research Center U.C. Berkeley.

MCC (Microelectronics and Computer Technology Corporation). 1993. Environmental Consciousness: A StrategicCompetitiveness Issue for the Electronics and Computer Industry: A Life Cycle Environmental Assessment of aComputer Workstation. MCC Technical Report. The Microelectronics and Computer Technology Corporation. p.359

MCC (Microelectronics and Computer Technology Corporation). 1994. Electronics Industry Environmental Roadmap.MCC Technical Report. The Microelectronics and Computer Technology Corporation. p. 108

MCC (Microelectronics and Computer Technology Corporation). 1996. 1996 Electronics Industry EnvironmentalRoadmap. MCC Technical Report MCC–ECESM–001–96, The Microelectronics and Computer TechnologyCorporation.

McCrum, N.G. et al. 1997. Principles of Polymer Engineering. 2nd ed. Oxford Science Publications.

Miric, A.Z. and W.C. Heraeus. 2000. Lead-free soldering: legislation, projects, alternatives, outlook. Proc. ElectronicsGoes Green 2000+, Berlin, pp. 31-36.

Modern Plastics. 2000. February.

Murphy, C.F., P.A. Sandborn, G.H. Schuldt, and J.W. Lott. 1997. Environmental and economic comparison of additiveand subtractive approaches for printed wiring board fabrication. Proc. IEEE International Symposium onElectronics and the Environment, pp. 240-245.


National Academy of Engineering. 1999. Industrial Environmental Performance Metrics: Challenges and Opportunities.National Academy Press: Washington D.C.

Nemerow, N.L. 1995. Zero Pollution for Industry. Wiley Interscience.

NIOSH. 1988. NIOSH Criteria for a Recommended Standard: Welding, Brazing, and Thermal Cutting. U.S. Dept. ofHealth and Human Services. NIOSH, Publication No. 88-110.

NRC (Transportation Research Board—National Research Council). 1997. Toward a Sustainable Future: Addressingthe Long-Term Effects of Motor Vehicle Transportation on Climate and Ecology. National Academy Press:Washington D.C.

NRC (Transportation Research Board—National Research Council). 1998. Review of the Research Program of thePartnership for a New Generation of Vehicles. National Academy Press: Washington D.C.

NSC (National Safety Council). 1999. Electronic Product Recovery and Recycling Baseline Report: Recycling ofSelected Electronic Products in the United States. National Safety Council Report.

Pimental, D., M. Tort, and L. D’Anna. 1998. Ecology of increasing disease. Bioscience. Vol. 48/ 10. pp. 817-826.

Pipes, R.B. and G. Fahrbach. 1999. Plastics recycling a benefit to the steel industry. Proceedings of Society of PlasticEngineers 6th Annual Recycling Conference, Detroit, Michigan. 5-8.

Pollmann, W. 1999. It’s also up to the politicians. DaimlerChrysler Environmental Report 1999 (magazine section). p. 7.

Rasul, J., W. Bratschun, and J. McGowen. 1997. Microvia bare board reliability assessment. Proc. IPC Expo, pp. S17-5-1 – S17-5-6.

Roederer, C. and L. Gourtsoyannis. 1997. Coordinated Study ‘Steel Environment’. EUR 16955 EN. Directorate-GeneralXII, Science, Research and Development.

Rogers, J. D. 2000. “Green Manufacturing: An Automotive Perspective.” Panel presentation on Green Manufacturing forNational Manufacturing Week. Chicago, IL, March.

Sailor, W.C. et al. 2000. A nuclear solution to climate change? Science. vol. 288. no. 5469 (19 May). p. 1177.

Sandborn, P.A. and C.F. Murphy. 1998. Material-centric modeling of PWB fabrication: An economic and environmentalcomparison of conventional and photovia board fabrication processes. IEEE Trans. on Components, Packaging,and Manufacturing Technology, Part C: Manufacturing, Vol. 21, No. 2, pp. 97-110.

Sandborn, P.A., and G. McFall. 1996. Performing design for environment concurrent with interdisciplinary tradeoffanalysis of electronic systems. Proc. IEEE International Symposium on Electronics and the Environment, pp. 167-172.

Segerberg, T., L. Gumaelius, H. Hessle, and E. Ostensson. 2000. Toxicological aspects of halogen free flame retardantsbased on denitrification inhibition tests. Proc. IEEE, International Symposium on Electronics and the Environment,pp. 69-74.

Service, R.F. 2000. New tigers in the fuel cell tank. Science. vol. 288. no. 5473 (16 June ). p. 1955

Sharfman, M. et al. 1999. “Conoco and the vapor recovery project.” J. Ind. Ecology, Vol. 3, No. 1.

SIA (Semiconductor Industry Association). 1999. The National Technology Roadmap for Semiconductors.Semiconductor Industry Association.

Simonson, M., and H. Stripple. 2000. LCA study of TV sets with V0 and HB enclosure material. Proc. IEEE,International Symposium on Electronics and the Environment, pp. 59-68.

Smil, V. 1998. “Future of oil: trends and surprises.” OPEC Review, Dec.

SPI (Society of the Plastics Industry). 1997. Facts and Figures of the U.S. Plastics Industry. Society of the PlasticsIndustry.

SPI. 1997. Contributions of Plastics to the U.S. Economy. Society of the Plastics Industry (by Probe Economics).Document # AB 138.

Squires, G.E. 2000. “Bromine Flame Retardants.” Presented at IPC Printed Circuits Expo, April 5.

Suh, N.P. 2001. Axiomatic Design: Advances and Application, Oxford Press.

Sullivan, J., R. Williams, S. Yester, E. Cobas-Flores, S. Chubbs, S. Hentges, and S. Pomper. 1998. “Life cycle inventoryof a generic U.S. family sedan.” SAE Paper #982160.

Toyota (Toyota Motor Corporation). 1999. Environmental Report 1999. p. 46.


Toyota (Toyota Motor Corporation). 2000. Web site, http://www.toyota.com/.

Turbini, L. et al. 2000. Examining the environmental impact of lead-free soldering alternatives. Proc. IEEE,International Symposium on Electronics and the Environment, pp. 46-53.

USCAR. 2000. Web site, http://www.uscar.org/.

Williams, J, L. Shu, and T. Murayama. 2000. Current status of extended producer responsibility legislation and effects onproduct design. Proc. 2000 Japan-USA Flexible Automation Conference. Ann Arbor, MI. JUSFA-13000, ASME.July.

Yue, Y., K.L. Gunter, D.J. Michalek, and J.W. Sutherland. 1999. An examination of cutting fluid mist formation inmachining. Trans. of NAMRI/SME. Vol. 27. May. pp. 221-226.

Zorpette, G. 1999. Waiting for the supercar. Scientific American. April.


101

CHAPTER 6

CROSS-CUTTING TECHNOLOGIES AND APPLICATIONS

Diana Bauer and Paul Sheng

INTRODUCTION

The major focus of pollution prevention work to-date has been on development of critical technologies formaterial processing and design tools and guidelines. While these are the key first steps towards societaladoption of environmentally benign practices, they are often not sufficient conditions for successfuldeployment. Consistency of motivation, coordination of activities, and communication between stakeholdersare also important. An industrial decision-maker has a confusing array of sometimes conflicting motivatingfactors, ranging from economics to regulations to customer requirements. For a new technology to have thegreatest chance to move beyond the laboratory, the motivations to use it should be clear and consistent.Another critical factor is that the coordination of interdisciplinary groups and processes required to deploytechnology, while not a unique need for environmental projects, is especially important given the wide scopeand breadth of knowledge required. Finally, means to effectively communicate requirements and measuredperformance among the relevant organizations and groups is important. This chapter strives to highlight someof these key factors for success. The factors become particularly acute when we place them in the lens ofregional or cross-border distinctions for Japan, Europe and the U.S. In general, the major dimensions neededto enable successful deployment are:

• Clear alignment of external mandates for improvement, such as regulation or certification

• Cascading communication and specification of the environmental mandate throughout the supply chainof a product

• Consistent management and interpretation of environmental information within and across multipleorganizations and stakeholders

• Explicit and/or implicit economic incentivization to scale environmental technology to a level at which itcan be sustained

This study presented us with a unique opportunity to examine environmental technology deployment throughcase studies across Japan, Europe, and the U.S. The data and information collected enabled us, first, to gaininsight into similarities and differences in how entities coordinate in bringing key technologies to scale, andsecond, to reflect on challenges for corporations and other organizations in developing global environmentalstrategies sensitive to local needs. The initial framework for examining these factors will be an industrialsupply chain, since key process and product engineering decisions are made in this context. However, theweb of influence actually reaches well beyond the supply chain to (among others) economic incentives,consumer perceptions, and governmental regulations. These aspects will be addressed later in the chapter.

COMMUNICATING REQUIREMENTS IN THE SUPPLY CHAIN

A starting framework for discussion is the supply chain, comprised of a set of geographically dispersedorganizations connected by material and information flows (Figure 6.1). Generally the flows of materials and

6. Cross-Cutting Technologies and Applications102

components in this context are unidirectional, dedicated, and relatively controllable, although with the use ofremanufactured and recycled content, there is now material feedback in some instances. The variousorganizations in the supply chain are also connected by a cascading set of requirements, originating fromcustomers and/or government regulators. These requirements in turn engender a set of motivating factors.

First, region-dependent customer requirements, such as material bans or recycling requirements, areimportant particularly for original equipment manufacturers (OEMs): these often have impacts onengineering decisions even outside of the region. For example, the restriction on brominated flame retardantsand heavy metals in electronic products was generated for the European consumer market, but has spurredsignificant R&D activity at Sony in Japan. The scale of the European market forces many manufacturers toface a critical decision: apply environmental technologies to comply with regional requirements or faceconsumer-based restrictions on market access.

Dismantler/Recycler

CustomerOEM

Tier 2Supplier

Tier 2Supplier

Tier 2Supplier

Tier 2 Supplier

Tier 1Supplier

Tier 1Supplier

GovernmentRegulator

Requirements

Information

Materials

Fig. 6.1. Material and information flow in the supply chain.

Second, motivation at the supplier level may be derived from the requirements of the supplier’s corporatecustomers, such as through ISO 14000 certification or eco-labeling requirements. A corporation’smotivations to apply these pressures are mixed, ranging from genuine environmental benevolence, to a desireto limit environmental liability risk, to a desire to improve corporate environmental image. For example,Ford is now requiring its suppliers to be ISO 14000 certified. It is also in the process of developing auniform set of metrics through the supply chain, such as for VOC emissions and total waste, to enablecorporate quarterly environmental performance reporting.

Third, environmental regulations and requirements are imposed directly by governmental agencies and alsopassed down the supply chain. For example, there are limits for copper content in effluent. In such a case,an OEM may give manufacturing equipment suppliers process specifications, such as for copper chemicalmechanical polishing (CMP) in the semiconductor industry. Additionally, there may be disposal regulations,such as regarding lead content in CRT computer monitors, which affect consumer purchase behavior.

To effectively communicate these requirements down the supply chain, the environmental specificationsmust be integrated with non-environmental specifications regarding product performance, manufacturability,quality, etc. There are two aspects of this type of information dissemination that require particular attention.First, the requirements must be presented at a level of resolution consistent with other requirements (such asdimensions, tolerances, and functional performance specification) through a simple interface; inundating asupplier with requirement information is counterproductive. Additionally, the efficient transmittal of thisinformation must leverage the existing supply chain management groups within OEMs and suppliers, whichin most systems is a proven link between organizations.

Diana Bauer and Paul Sheng 103

In addition to communication between organizations, communication between functions is also important.Within each supplier and OEM organization there are multiple departments with potentially competing roles.In order for environmental management to be effective both within and outside of the organization,environmental activities must be integrated appropriately into these individual functions. Roles that areimportant for specifying, transmitting, and meeting environmental performance objectives range fromsupplier production planning and environmental health and safety to OEM procurement and product designto consumer purchasing and recycler processing. Each of these roles has its own set of drivers andmotivating factors ranging from regulatory compliance to cost minimization to minimization of liability risk(Figure 6.2). Coordination of these activities to achieve optimal environmental performance requires clearleadership from a group with clear visibility across organizational boundaries (e.g., OEM leadership,governmental regulators, etc.).

End-of-liferecovery

Productuse

ProductOEM

ComponentmanufacturingMaterial production

Key decisionmakers:

Motivatingfactors:

• Consumers• Institutional users

• Total cost ofownership

• Health hazards• Pollution to

immediate useenvironment

• Fee for service• Recovery value of

reclaimed materials/components

• Minimization ofdisposal risks

• 3rd party logistics/reclamation

• Contract recyclers

• Product designers• Procurement/

materials managers• Marketing/brand

managers

• Production planner• Facility manager• EH&S manager

• Reduction in wastedisposal cost/risk

• Compliance togovernmentregulations

• Qualification to OEMstandards

• Minimize total costof ownership

• Minimize liabilityrisk

• Meet certificationstandards set byindustry ororganizations

• Explore potential formarketing “green”attributes

Fig. 6.2. Supply chain decision-makers and their motivating factors.

DATA, INFORMATION, AND KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT

One way that such a group can demonstrate clear leadership is through standardization of data, information,and knowledge management. A major challenge for information flow within a company or organization istransmission across interfaces between functions, as shown in Figure 6.3. In this view, the corporateleadership sets targets that can be in areas such as energy consumption, waste minimization, and restrictedsubstances. These targets are then conveyed to the product designer, which in the case of banned substancesis straightforward but in the case of continuous targets such as energy efficiency and waste minimizationrequires a strategic apportioning of effort among products. The designer in turn interprets the targets throughmaterial, process, and design specifications to the production planner and facilities manager. Metrics andperformance measures applying to the continuous targets, such as hazardous substance emissions, localhealth hazards, waste disposal, and energy consumption are then fed back up the hierarchy at an appropriatelevel of resolution.

In our contact with companies, cross industry sectors and geographies, we have come across a uniform needto better support cross-functional and multi-layered transfer of environmental information and decision-making, including:

• A formalism for aggregating measures at different layers while preserving the value of information

• Linkage of specifications and targets with actual measures and benchmarks

• Trajectory of continuous improvement against targets

• Consistent prioritization among objectives

• Linkage to economic and engineering performance


Productdesigner

CorporateManagement

Materialsplanner

Productionplanner

Facilities,EHS

manager

• Processemissions

• Process energyuse

• Process wastegeneration

• Product manufacturing energy• Product manufacturing

emissions• Use phase emissions

• Corporate/supply chain energyconsumption

• Corporate/supply chain wasteminimization

• Banned and controlledsubstances

• Process materialconsumption

• Material recyclabiltiy• Material strength/

weight ratio

Representative MetricsExample Targetsand Specifications

Fig. 6.3. Organizational levels of aggregation for actuation and assessment of environmental activities.

Some of the companies the WTEC panel visited are starting to address these areas. Figure 6.4 illustratescoordinated levels of activities and metrics at Chaparral Steel. At the corporate level, opportunities forprocess synergies between steel and cement operations were identified. Energy use and air pollutionreduction targets were set. Automotive steel was targeted as a key source of scrap to drive the recyclingprocess. These corporate level directives led to actions both internally and within the supply chain, includingsetting up a material exchange infrastructure enabling steel slag to be used as cement kiln feed. This servedcorporate level goals, as the corporate level raw material cost is linked to the supply chain level consumptionof gypsum or anhydrite. At the facility level, energy use and air pollution reduction levels relating to thecorporate targets were set. And technologies that met these performance targets were acquired and/ordeveloped. These included dry cement manufacturing operations and flotation separation of non-ferrousmetals and halogenated plastics.

Corporateleadership

Corporateleadership

FacilityFacility

Supply chainSupply chain

• Identified opportunity for process synergies between steel and cement

• Set directives for energy use and air pollution reduction

• Developed efficient source of scrap metal recovery to feed steel processing

• Set up a material exchange infrastructure between steel and cement production

• Used steel slag as cement kiln feed• Calcium sulfate recovered from scrubbers

• Reduced nitrogen oxides using CO emissions from cement production

• Converted cement operations from wet to dry• Separated by floatation non-ferrous metals and

halogenated plastics

• Energy consumption for cement production

• Air pollutant levels• Amount of materials recovered• Presence of trace contaminants

(e.g., PCBs)

• Energy consumption for cement production

• Air pollutant levels (CO2)• Consumption of gypsum or anhydrite

• Raw material cost• Utility cost• Residual value of recovered

materials• Air quality compliance

Actions Metrics

Fig. 6.4. Hierarchical decision-making at Chaparral Steel.

Coordination of activities beyond a single company is important. For example, an OEM may choose totransfer high-impact processes to its supplier. In this instance, while the measures for the OEM improves


dramatically, the environmental impact over the entire supply chain has not changed. In the worst case,overall performance may decline, since smaller organizations often have neither the clear environmentalmandate nor the resources of the OEM. A case like this illustrates that managing the information flowsthrough the supply chain system is critical because consistent and appropriate information flow provides themeans to assess overall system performance.

Transferring measures, targets and decisions across organizations brings additional layers of complexitybeyond that within an organization and requires greater structure and formalism. Supply chain managementactivities directed at purchased components generally fall into four categories (Table 6.1). First, operationalrequirements imply an adherence to local laws (relating to process emissions, disposal and material content)or to environmental management systems, resulting in minimal data flow.

Second, environmental guidelines can be applied to purchased components, supplier-sited manufacturingprocesses, and manufacturing equipment. These guidelines fall short of clear mandates but representcommonly accepted best practices across a supply chain or industry sector. Guidelines address aspects ofmaterials, products, and equipment such as material use and content, energy efficiency, ease of repair, andease of recycling. For example IBM has enacted a corporate standard for “environmentally conscious design”(IBM Corporate Environmental Standards, IBM Site Report, Gabriel et al. 2000) that requires materials ofconcern, such as cadmium, to be identified in a required environmental profile if they are contained inproducts. Additional guidelines also address design for reuse and recyclability. Both operationalrequirements and guidelines are primarily means for transmitting directives from an OEM, rather than forevaluating or monitoring actual supplier performance.

A third category of supply chain information is used to fulfill data reporting and tracking needs. This typeof information often is used to monitor supplier performance, such as in waste stream discharge or materialhandling. A more complicated and challenging application is aggregation of data from many suppliers tocharacterize the overall environmental performance of a product or OEM. An example of data reporting is ofenergy consumption so that performance against targets set in response to the Kyoto accords can be tracked.Ford and Toyota have such programs. Also, at Ford and Toyota, there are programs to track use ofhazardous or frequently used substances. Toyota additionally has a program in place to track frequently usedand hazardous substances such as mercury, lead, and CFCs through the supply chain. Wide-scale datatracking introduces challenges similar to those found in assembling life cycle inventory data; in order for dataaggregation from multiple organizations to be meaningful, data collection and reporting practices must bestandardized and validated across the supply chain. Also, strategies for improvement are difficult to developwhen the performance data are not linked to process parameters through mechanistic models or other means.

The first three categories of supply chain management shown in Table 6.1 are focused on evaluation andincremental improvement and are consistent with the common definition found in green procurement, ratherthan environmental supply chain management (Nagels 2000b). In the fourth category, more dramaticchanges can in theory be facilitated by cooperating with suppliers and investing in development of newmaterials and processes through knowledge exchange. However, though some companies such as Ford havesupplier classes in ISO 14000, little technical collaboration between OEMs and suppliers to stimulateenvironmental innovation was reported at the sites visited. This is an important area for focus of effort in thefuture.

While the above four categories of information flow imply unidirectional reporting from the supply base tothe OEM (and for some types, ultimately government), the supply chain relationship and related informationflow in practice is bi-directional. In many cases, forward-thinking suppliers anticipate the needs ofcustomers in addition to abiding by current requirements (Table 6.2). Materials producers, such as NipponSteel and Hoogovens, are increasingly working with customers to devise solutions to environmentalchallenges. For example, with the recycling requirements initiated by the European and Japanese producttake-back laws, enhancing recyclability for materials, such as coated automotive steel, has become a priority.Another challenge is to develop new alloys with higher performance-to-weight ratios based on energyconsumption reduction goals in the automotive industry.


Table 6.1Levels of Supply Chain Management Requirements Focusing on Components and Processes

Legal Agreements Required to obey local environmental lawsOperational Requirements

EnvironmentalManagementRequirements

Adoption of environmental management systems (such as ISO14000)

Implementation of product assessment

Activities related to the recovery/recycling of used products

Activities relating to preserving the ozone layer/preventingglobal warming

Product Design Environmental purchase guidelines: banned substances,substances to avoid, substances requiring control

Energy efficiency

Ease of repair

Use of reusable materials

Ease of recycling

Guidelines

Process Requirements Production guidelines: banned substances, substances to avoid,substances requiring control

Data Reporting andTracking

Required provision of process emissions data, energy use data, material use data

Knowledge andInformation Exchange

Supplier liaison environmental action committees

Technology transfer

Joint technology development

Source: Compiled from IBM, NEC, Toyota Corporate Environmental Reports

Table 6.2Typical Environmental Needs of Customers

Materials High performance/weight ratio

easily recyclable

Equipment Controlled water use

Consistent power draw

Reusable/reconfigurable

Nonhazardous consumables

Additionally, there are supply chain information management activities particularly important at product end-of-life. For the capturing of residual value of components, one particular challenge for recycling is thetransfer of relevant information (such as material content, remaining component life, component value)forward in time to a known or unknown recycling organization. This can be done simply through codelabeling of polymer parts, or more complexly through embedded sensors which track product use and/ormonitor or measure degradation, such as caused by fatigue or other sources of degradation. Component usepatterns and projected failure rates can also be linked through statistical estimation. For example, Fuji Xeroxdetermines which parts are reusable by tracking the copy count history for individual parts in its copyingmachines. The projected remaining life for each component is then estimated using Weibell analysis.Component value can also be tracked in an external database, such as at the Noranda recycling facility. AtNoranda, current market prices are tracked for different possible (dis)aggregations of varying grades ofcomponents and materials, and the prices compared against the projected costs of handling and disassemblingthe incoming product streams.

One class of companies requiring especially keen insights into anticipated environmental needs is productionequipment manufacturers such as semiconductor equipment manufacturer Applied Materials (Figure 6.5).


Applied Materials is challenged by an array of location-dependent requirements, such as for electricityconsumption and water use, that may not be clearly expressed up front because the main customer base(semiconductor manufacturers) generally focus on more traditional performance metrics such as productionrate and yield when arriving at equipment specifications. In cases where environmental concerns havebecome a priority, semiconductor manufacturers generally address these issues at a facility, rather than anequipment level, which implies a post-process remediation, rather than a process-intrinsic preventionemphasis. The OEM has one further level of segregation from key decisions that drive semiconductormanufacturing environmental performance. The situation is further complicated by communicationschallenges, such as:

• Loss of insight on systems performance as data (such as water use, global warming potential emissions)rather than predictive models or analyses are transferred from organization to organization

• Difficulty in apportioning low level requirements (such as supplier specifications) from high levelguidelines (such as facilities water usage limits)

• Lack of interface between functions (e.g., supplier EHS to semiconductor manufacturer processengineering, supplier process engineering to semiconductor manufacturer EHS, supplier processengineering/marketing to OEM design groups)

The challenge for an equipment supplier is to work with customers to enable facilities-level environmentalmanagement through development of equipment level design specifications and assessment metrics.Figure 6.5 illustrates the chain of specifications and array of motivating factors facing Applied Materials andits customers. One approach taken by Applied has been to focus on the development of embedded treatmentsystems (e.g., water recycling) without sacrificing process integrity, cost effectiveness and technologicaladvantage.

Semiconductormanufacturer

Equipmentsupplier

OEM

Regulatorypressure

Resourcescarcity

Costeffectiveness

Technologicaladvantage

Processintegrity

Specifications

Motivatingfactors

Organization

• Process environmentaltargets

• Need for treatmentequipment

• Treatment systemconfiguration andrequirements

Fig. 6.5. Design for environment in the CMP process.

After organizational communications, a second significant challenge is the characterization of data—potentially including the mechanistic link to process parameters and performance—appropriate to the rangeof environmental objectives held by the various decision-makers in the various relevant organizations.Linked to data requirements is the development of metrics for performance measurement and assessment.

One of the challenges for information management is that environmental data cannot necessarily becompared and evaluated in its collected form. For this, benchmarking and metric characterization andstandardization is required. For example, emission and energy data aggregated at the facility level may bereadily obtained, but true insight into environmental impact from an OEM perspective (particularly for anevaluation of global and regional scale effects) may best be gained through a comparison at the componentlevel. However, metrics that are both realistic for data gathering and appropriate for comparison can bechallenging to develop. Furthermore, while there may be a desire to completely track a product’senvironmental performance, the value of this analysis does not always justify the effort due to the followingfactors:


• Difficulty in attributing facility-level environmental performance (e.g., resource use, energyconsumption) to individual manufactured components

• Problems with collapsing multiple dimensions of environmental performance down to a single or smallset of metrics

• Missing link between effort spent on environmental performance characterization and environmentalperformance improvement

There were different approaches to metric development seen at the sites visited by the WTEC team. Asummary of these is shown in Table 6.3. As can be seen from the table, one common corporate approach isto track and aggregate one or several dimensions of environmental performance, such as energy use or solidwaste generation. The advantage here is that these are (relatively) easy to measure and track at differentscales. Energy use, for example, can be evaluated at levels ranging from that of a single process up to anentire corporation. It can be normalized by many factors, such as by dollar, by product, or by facility. Thedisadvantage is that the environmental effects considered are limited. The quantity of environmental effectsconsidered could be increased by creating additional categories, such as lead, chlorinated solvents, NOx, etc.,but soon the ability to evaluate at multiple levels and discern overall environmental improvements is dilutedby the multitude of effects considered.

Table 6.3Metric Types

Type of Metric Sites Used Advantages/ Disadvantages

Aggregation of Single Measure

Energy Ford, Toyota, NEC

Solid Waste Toyota

Material Usage Lucent

Relatively easy to normalize, optimize and track atdifferent scales

But, doesn’t address multiple effects

Aggregation of Different Effects

EcoIndicator Lucent

Includes multiple effects

But isn’t transparent, and goal setting lessstraightforward

A second type of approach used that addresses this disadvantage is to apply scaled weightings. One methodis based on anticipated ecological, health, and/or resource impacts, such as through the EcoIndicator, whichis used by Lucent. The EcoIndicator considers the following effects: greenhouse gas, ozone depletion,acidification, eutrophication, metals, carcinogenesis, summer smog, and winter smog (Pre 1999). Thisapproach does allow for comparison across more potential effects, but it may not consider all dimensions ofenvironmental performance that are important. For example, the EcoIndicator does not consider water use.Also, the method is not as transparent and not as tangible as aggregations based on a single measure, andtherefore it is difficult to set meaningful targets at the corporate level. In fact, though Lucent used theEcoIndicator to evaluate product design alternatives, none of the sites visited reported setting corporate leveltargets using an EcoIndicator or similar method.

Table 6.4 shows the observed priorities for environmental management in the regions studied. The localizedenvironmental and health hazard focus of environmental priorities in the U.S. makes it challenging todevelop metrics that can be scaled up and managed globally within a corporation. This is not to say that theEuropean or Japanese environmental priorities can be measured and managed perfectly through metrics. But,in any event, coordinated supply chain efforts are more difficult in cases where the metrics are less clear.Management of corporate environmental performance across regional boundaries is further complicated bydifferences in the priorities themselves.

Regional differences in objectives, in some cases, can even lead to a difference in environmental approachwithin the same organization. For instance, the main environmental focus for DaimlerChrysler (Germany) ison design for recyclability, while the focus for DaimlerChrysler (U.S.) is towards minimizing processemissions (see discussion later in this section). Can a corporation consistently meet the most stringent globalenvironmental requirements along all dimensions? In some instances it is unclear whether it is best for a


transnational corporation to integrate environmental best practices across borders or to maintain separateoperations.

Table 6.4Observed Environmental Priorities and Corresponding Metrics

Region Priority Suitable Metrics for Aggregation

Japan Production: energy use and waste minimization Aggregation of single measure

Product design EcoIndicatorEurope

Recyclability Unknown

U.S. Localized health and environmental hazards Unknown

Once the current local or global environmental objectives have been specified and linked to datarequirements, gathered data must be standardized, validated, and maintained at multiple levels of resolution.Managing and manipulating such large quantities of data in many cases necessitates development of adatabase. This raises additional issues, such as structure, location, access, and protocol. Modes of datatransmission, aggregation, and delivery must be developed. There is the additional challenge of maintainingtransparency while abiding by proprietary requirements. In order for the flow of data and information to beeffective, data management should be cost-effective, and generation and use of the data must be integratedinto existing and evolving practice within the relevant organizations.

ALIGNMENT OF TECHNOLOGY, REGULATION, AND ECONOMIC DRIVERS

Enhanced flow of data and information can enable and highlight potential improvements and stimulaterelevant technology development, given existing cost and regulatory drivers. However, this is not sufficientto achieve some environmental performance attributes. For example, if the cost of the environmental impactof process emissions is not fully internalized and such emissions are not regulated, there is little incentive toeffect environmental improvement. In these cases, enhancement of regulations, incentives, and/or economicdrivers is required. Most effective activities, both from an industrial and from an environmental policyperspective, require alignment of technology (such as pollution prevention and environmentally benignmaterials), cost (such as for resource acquisition and disposal), and regulatory drivers (such as limitations onair, water, and solid waste emissions) (Figure 6.6). Each of these areas has its own modes for informationtransmission, as well.

Economic drivers

Technology

Regulations andincentives

Key Elements• Environmentally benign

materials• Energy efficiency• Dry processes• Recycling processesInformation Transmission• Technology transfer• Environmental metrics• Design for Environment

tools

Key Elements• Air, water, and solid emissions regulations• International standards (e.g., ISO 14000)• Eco-labeling incentivesInformation Transmission• Industry roadmaps• Environmental management systems• Education programs/ public dialogue

Key Elements• Total life-cycle cost for

product stewardship• Waste disposal and abatement

cost reduction• Revenue streams from

demanufacturing• Reduction in liability and risk

management costInformation Transmission• Environmental accounting• Cost-of-ownership modeling

Fig. 6.6. Technology, incentives, and cost drivers combine to strengthen environmental activities.


In cases where environmental benefit relates to efficiency—such as for materials, energy, water, and landfillspace—environmental cost can usually be internalized and a culture of continuous improvement created. Inthis scenario, environmental performance can be sustained without an external driver or stimulus. However,for cases where cost advantage is not aligned with environmentally favorable behavior, there may be a lackof incentive to exceed a compliance level in environmental performance (and therefore, to develop anddeploy critical technologies), unless components and products with enhanced environmental performance canbe sold at a higher price (Figure 6.7). In these cases, an external market stimulus such as a government orOEM-led subsidy must be put in place to foster sustainability, at least until broad-level behavioral changesoccur. Environmental policy which best integrates into this vision is flexible and developed collaborativelywith industry and other stakeholders, rather than the traditional command and control approach.

$SellingPrice

$SellingPrice

EnvironmentalMetric

EnvironmentalConstraint

Fig. 6.7. Moving from compliance to continuous improvement.

An example illustrating government-initiated improved alignment of technology, incentives, and economicdrivers in the Japanese PVC industry is shown in Figure 6.8. Key technology developed was a three-layerco-extrusion process for composite recycled/virgin sash with adequate aesthetic and structural properties.However, this technology was not sufficient on its own to stimulate wide-scale adoption because it involvedhigher logistic costs and a lower level of performance than virgin PVC. Part of the reason for the costdiscrepancy is that the end-of-life disposal cost for the PVC was not originally internalized into the PVCindustry costs. To counter this lack of internalization, the Japanese government imposed a construction sitedisposal fee that was then applied to subsidize the logistics of collection, sortation, and recycling. Thisenabled recycled PVC producers to sell at prices comparable to virgin sash. The Japanese government alsodeveloped an educational program to encourage a select group of construction industry buyers to selectrecycled PVC. The alignment of all of these factors led to a general transition from the use of virgin to theuse of recycled PVC sash in northern Japan.

• Disposal fee subsidizesmaterial collection, sortationand recycling

• Recycled line pipe and sashpriced equal to products madefrom virgin material

• Japanese government assessesdisposal fee for all constructionsites

• Consumers (contractors) areeducated to specify recycledPVC sash and pipes based onenvironmental benefits, eventhough properties are inferior tovirgn material

• 3-layer co-extrusionprocess developed tocreate composite sash− Retain aesthetics of

new products− Preserve structural

advantages of PVC− Allow mass

production ofrecycled sash

Economic drivers

Technology


Fig. 6.8. Cross-cutting drivers for PVC recycling.


A more general, widespread use of regulation to expand the region of internalized costs is the ongoingdevelopment of product take-back laws in Europe and Japan (Figure 6.9). Under the traditional mode ofproduct development, manufacturers are not responsible for the recycling or disposal of their products. Inthis case, a manufacturer derives no financial benefit from investment in designs and technologies thatfacilitate product end-of-life management, since another party must pay the costs associated with disposal.The new laws have spurred emerging R&D activities in an array of technologies ranging from automateddisassembly to natural fiber components.

EnergyMaterial WaterDisposal

Internal Costs

RecyclingProduct Disposal

Extended Responsibility

External Costs

Resource Degradation Species Extinction

Acid Rain

Ozone Depletion

Global Warming

Public Health

Fig. 6.9. Expanding the region of internal costs through extended producer responsibility.

It should be pointed out that recycling is not necessarily the most economical or even the most environmentalstrategy at the end of a product life. However, internalizing the environmental costs associated with productend-of-life stimulates a producer to select the preferred option and to devise system-level strategies,including those that reduce costs and potential environmental impacts associated with logistics and transport.Relevant strategies range from reducing volume by grinding polymers prior to transport (so that fewer truckscan be used) to leveraging existing supply channels for product take-back (through leasing or servicingagreements) to decentralizing recycling facilities.

Economic incentives can further stimulate relevant technological development, as illustrated by the followingexample of activities at DaimlerChrysler (Figure 6.10). Government subsidies for development ofenvironmentally benign materials align with end-of-life vehicle take-back and recycled content legislation toencourage new materials development in Europe. The recycled content and fuel economy requirementscombine to pose dramatic technical challenges. Supplier ISO 14000 subsidies lead to increases in the levelof ISO 14000 compliance. Though there is an alignment of factors leading to product end-of-life activities inEurope, it has been challenging to develop a coordinated corporate approach in the U.S., since the vehicleend-of-life costs are not internalized in this country. A key corporate decision in this case is on deployment:roll out the critical technology within a single region or deploy globally. So far in the case ofDaimlerChrysler, products are deployed with regional content and specifications, limiting the spread of keytechnologies in areas such as fuel efficiency and recyclability; however, there would be clear globalenvironmental benefit if these technologies were to be more uniformly deployed. Ford is taking a differentapproach to deployment and is developing global vehicle design for recyclability guidelines, based onEuropean recyclablility requirements.

VISION FOR THE FUTURE

The integration and coordination of environmental activities within and across organizations is a keychallenge for environmentally benign manufacturing practitioners and policymakers. Both enhancedinformation flow and better mechanisms for multiple levels of technological and motivational alignment areimportant for effective cross-cutting activities.


Economic drivers

Technology


• Dismantlingtechnologies

• Design for environmenttools Plastic sortationtechnologies

• Natural fibers (sisal andflax) in FRP

• End-of-life vehicle take-backlegislation

• Industry agreements on recycledcontent and fuel economy

– 75% by weight by 2001,increasing to 95% by 2010

– 40% improvement in fueleconomy by 2006

• ISO 14000 compliance• Cultural compatibility between

Europe and U.S.

• Subsidies to suppliers to allowcompliance to ISO 14000

• Litigation risk based on regionalenvironmental concerns

• Government subsidies forresearch on environmentallybenign materials

Fig. 6.10. Cross-cutting drivers for vehicle recycling—DaimlerChrysler.

Figure 6.11 illustrates important key enablers for fostering the growth of environmental activities in the long,medium, and short term. First, a collaborative identification of needs among industry, government, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and academic organizations is key to setting a long-range R&D agenda.This agenda must also encompass a clear program for public environmental education. Seed funding intechnologies, environmental metrics, and infrastructure and logistics can be initiated at this stage.

Scale to critical massDeploymentResearch

and Planning

• Corporate leadership commitment to environmental performance

• Clear benefits identified• Clear performance targets

identified• Project sustainability

requirements specified– Market conditions– Subsidies required

• Regulations and incentives required

• Timing to scale developed• Flexibility to adapt to regional

needs

• Identification of cross-cutting needs through:

– Industry– Government/NGO– Academics/research

organizations• Seed funding of a balanced

research portfolio – Technology– Metrics for decision-

making– Logistics/infrastructure

development– Environmental effects

prioritization• Pave the way for deployment

– Consumer awareness building

– Industry incentivization– Education– Public dialog on

environmental values

• Commitments from supply chain partners

• External stimulus in place– Taxes/subsidies– Regulations– Certification standards

• Momentum of movement for industry leaders towards adoption

Fig. 6.11. Important long, medium, and short range activities.


The medium term set of enablers revolves around initial deployment, which requires commitment bycorporate leadership through agenda setting. For some technologies, regulatory and economic stimuli mayneed to be initiated through environmental policymaking to position for scale-up. For others, cost benefitsneed to be highlighted through corporate education, or environmental benefits may need to be highlightedthrough public education. Needs for regional flexibility based on localized public values and resourcescarcity are identified.

At the scale-up phase, commitment from supply chain partners is required. The incentives are in place, andearly adoption by industry leaders encourages others to participate. Clearly this scale of coordinated effortrequires multiple levels of communication, cooperation, and understanding—between industry andregulators, OEMs and suppliers, different regions, and all public stakeholders.

Table 6.5 summaries key roles in this effort for the different entities. Roles range from the most strategicresearch planning (NSF/DOE) to environmental leadership at OEMs to facilitating dialogue at NGOs. Toaddress cross-cutting priorities, needed at the various levels are projects and visions that integrate differentsubsets of technology, environment, economics, and policy. One of the greatest challenges for theseactivities is that, to be most effective, the different entities must act in a coordinated fashion.

None of the regions visited were fully successful at integrating all of these roles into planning, research,deployment, and scale-up activities. Notable areas of strong effort are shown in Table 6.5. Japan wasstrong on leadership from OEMs and supplier-OEM relationships. Some of the countries in Europe,particularly the Netherlands, were developing innovative strategies for incentivization in policy.

Cross-cutting activities are particularly difficult, not for scientific or technical reasons, but rather becausethey require collaboration and coordination among organizations and groups which are not accustomed tocommunicating, much less cooperating. Lessons can be learned from successful approaches in othercompanies and countries. But key is strong strategic technology research and environmental policyleadership that applies a broad systems view to prioritize and guide efforts in academics and industry.

REFERENCES

Gabriel, J., M. Jacques, J.R. Kirby, T. Mann, D. Pitts. 2000. ECP integration into the supply chain: An IBM perspective.IEEE International Symposium on Electronics & the Environment. pp. 225-229.

Klausner, M., W.M. Grimm, C. Hendrickson. 1998. Reuse of electric motors in consumer products. Journal of IndustrialEcology 2:2, pp. 89-102.

IBM. 1999. Environment and Well Being Progress Report.

IBM. 1997. Corporate Standard: Environmentally Conscious Design. C-S 1-9700-020 1997-05.

World Bank. 1999. Japanese Iron and Steel Industry and Its Environmental Conservation Efforts.

Nagel, M.H. 2000a. Environmental supply chain management versus life-cycle analysis method ecoindicator ’95: Arelative business perspective versus an absolute environmental perspective. IEEE International Symposium onElectronics & the Environment pp. 118-123.

Nagel, M.H. 2000b. Environmental Supply Chain Management versus Green Procurement in the Scope of a BusinessLeadership Perspective. pp. 219-224.

Mosovsky, J., D. Dickinson, J. Morabito. 2000. Creating competitive advantage through resource productivity,ecoefficiency, and sustainability in the supply chain. IEEE International Symposium on Electronics & theEnvironment pp. 230-237.

Pre Consultants. 1999. Eco-Indicator ’99. http://www.pre.nl/eco-indicator99/default.htm.

Toyota. 1999. Environmental Report 1998.

Toyota. 1999. Energy Minimization Activities Manual for Automotive Manufacturing Plants.

Wallace, D. 1995. Environmental Policy and Industrial Innovation: Strategies in Europe, the US, and Japan.

White, C. 1999. “Closing the material Loop: Investigating the dynamics of, motivations for, and obstacles to materialrecycling through a case study on product recovery and demanufacturing in the computer industry.” UC BerkeleyMasters Thesis.


Table 6.5Key Tasks By Organization For Cross Cutting Activities

Organization Type Key Tasks Region of Strength

Identify and fund key technology areas

Develop strategies for cross-cutting research EU strength

Research Agency

(NSF/DOE)

Develop environmental data/ information managementschemes (such as LCA) with potential long termbenefit to support industrial optimization and decision-making

Identify environmental problem areas

Identify national performance targets

Develop policy approaches which move towardsinternalizing society’s environmental costs

EU strength

Develop policy approaches which integrate economicsand technology

Develop strategies for cross-cutting research

Environmental Agency

(EPA)

Develop environmental data/ information managementschemes/ metrics (such as those in LCA) with longterm benefit to support environmental policy decision-making

Interdisciplinary research integrating technology,economic factors and environmental policy

Educate engineering students to considerenvironmental factors

Academy

Research on environmental data and informationmanagement systems

Demonstrate leadership and commitment toenvironmental performance

Japan strength

Identify performance targets Japan strength

Respond to policy directives

Integrate environmental requirements into supplierspecifications

OEMs

Collaborate with suppliers on development of newtechnologies

Supplier Industry Anticipate and respond to OEM environmental needs

Voice environmental prioritiesPublic

Match behavior to environmental priorities

Identify environmental problem areas

Facilitate public, government, industry dialogue

NGOs

Help develop and assure certification standards EU strength

115

CHAPTER 7

RESEARCH STRUCTURE TO DEVELOP EBM T ECHNOLOGIES

Egon Wolff

SUMMARY

A review of research activities observed during the WTEC panel’s visits and an overview of governmentalpolicies, processes, and methods used to address knowledge deficiencies is provided. In general, the panelwitnessed a collaborative and less confrontational research environment between industry and government inboth Japan and Europe to solve environmentally benign manufacturing (EBM) issues. It is hoped thatrecommended future R&D work in the United States would also benefit from a greatly enhancedcollaborative process.

INTRODUCTION

Today, in the United States, we are in the midst of a long economic boom stimulated by a rapid rate ofinnovation in both physical products and conceptual ideas. At the center of this process is a continual pushto create new technologies and eliminate old ones, a process described by Joseph Schumpeter (1950) in hisconcept of “Creative Destruction.” Simply, firms that can sustain the pace of innovation dictated by theglobal economy will succeed, while the others will fail. In the European Union (EU) and Japan, the pace ofinnovation is rapidly approaching that of the U.S. and in some cases exceeding it. Economic growth willfollow successful innovation.

The innovation “environment” in the United States encompasses a complex mix of institutions and policiesthat are often disconnected. The institutions include universities performing research and education,corporate research laboratories, supplier research laboratories, not-for-profit research laboratories, nationallaboratories (e.g., those funded by the Department of Energy), National Science Foundation (NSF) fundedactivities, and National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) funded activities. Here, cooperationamong the publicly and privately funded research entities is limited by legal and intellectual propertyconstraints. In contrast, in the EU and Japan the panel saw more cooperation at the institutional level. Forexample, in Europe there have been efforts to pool resources to create a critical mass of shared expertise, themost notable being the inter-company and industry/academia/governmental alliances. In Japan, MITI is wellknown for its coordination of national research and development. As pointed out by Landau, Taylor andWright (1996), governmental, institutional and social policies and cooperation can determine levels ofcomparative advantages in innovation (see Table 7.1).

Even from a static perspective, the process of innovation has an added non-quantifiable dimension ofcomplexity—people. The most significant information cannot produce economic value without humancreativity and intellect. Moreover, the knowledge required to innovate is not just the codified knowledgefound in books and taught in universities, but also the tacit knowledge rooted in individual experience,beliefs, perspectives and values. Being a successful innovator is not sufficient; one must innovate at a pacethat exceeds the competition, and it is the characteristics of the people that largely determine this speed ofinnovation.

7. Research Structure to Develop EBM Technologies116

Table 7.1Levels of Comparative Advantage

National governance

Socio-political climate

Macro policies Fiscal

Monetary

Trade

Tax

Institutional setting Financial

Legal (including torts, antitrust, and intellectual property)

Corporate governance Professional bodies

Intermediating institutions

Structural and supportive policies Education (including university-industry relations)

Labor

Tax

Science and technology (including role of engineers and scientists)

Regulatory and environmental

The industry collectively

Companies within the industry

An example of the process of innovation is the current interest in EBM. Each region that we visited—theU.S., the European Union (EU), and Japan—has a different approach to developing an environmentallybenign manufacturing strategy. Each region also has different drivers. In the U.S., the drivers are thecorrelation between cost savings and the environmental benefit, given the vast space available for landfills.In the EU, the high population density, a recycle mindset, and take-back provisions drive environmentalpolicy (see also Chapter 2). In Japan, the environmental policy drivers are the export economy, highpopulation density and ISO 14000.

For American firms with a majority of sales abroad, such as Boeing, IBM, and Caterpillar, responding to theU.S. drivers alone is not sufficient. A broader vision that includes design for environment issues is necessaryas an integral part of their future. For many of these companies, EBM is now a major component ofresponsible economic growth. A key conclusion of this panel is that there are substantial benefits topromoting proactive environmental management rather than reactive end-of-pipe behaviors amongmanufacturers and R&D for manufacturing. In many instances, this proactive behavior can be very costeffective. This requires that environmental considerations be included as part of the entire system from botha business and an engineering viewpoint.

POLICIES

Environmentally benign manufacturing is a broad concept involving many aspects of society and how theyinteract. Figure 4.1 in Chapter 4, contributed by Bert Bras, shows this idea graphically. Many of the issuesaddressed by EBM must be solved at the largest scale, including all of society, as shown in the figure. Agood example of this complexity is the issue of energy policy. Currently, carbon based fuels provide morethan 75 percent of the world’s energy supply. The support structure that enables this usage is pervasivethroughout society, and includes exploration, extraction, refining and processing, distribution and thedevelopment of compatible heating, transportation and power applications. During the next century, thedevelopment of economically competitive renewable energy sources will require extensive collaborativedevelopment. Attention will have to be focused, not only on the individual components of the problem, butalso on their interconnection. For example, a new energy source cannot be viable until the complete systemof delivery is realized in a mode that is compatible with society’s values for safety, economy, environmental

Egon Wolff 117

protection and equality. Similar collaborative development activities will be required to implement almostall aspects of an environmentally benign manufacturing strategy.

The development of a workable proactive policy to foster EBM behaviors is a major challenge to society.The solution requires shared information and unified goals for the many players involved. The panel foundno shortage of examples of failed policies when the inputs of various parties were ignored. In particular,end-of-pipe solutions appear to be of this type, mandating results without sufficient concern for the means.For example, there are a number of instances where well-intended policies and initiatives have unintendedconsequences because the underlying manufacturing processes were not well understood by those stipulatingthe end-of-pipe regulations. Examples of this include the initial German take-back initiative (which faileddue to an immature infrastructure), PCB contamination in some plastics (which makes it impractical torecycle despite careful separation), and the questionable environmental merits of alternative technologiessuch as Pb-free solder and water-based paints.

However, the new EU initiatives on automotive product take-back, and those of Japan on consumer andelectronic goods, have relied on substantial public and private sector feedback and cooperative decisionmaking. This has helped with the development of targets, metrics, and tools to manage product take-backand the development of infrastructures and policies to support them. Currently, under the European Councilof Ministers direction, the following actions at the EU level are included in national programs:

• Agreement in 1998 with the automobile industry to improve fuel efficiency

• Legislation on waste (the landfill directive)

• The Strategy and Action Plan on Renewables (Altener program)

Funding Strategies

In contrast to the United States, research funding in Japan and the EU enjoys relatively coordinated supportover the entire range of activities required to bring a new technology to market. In comparison, U.S. fundingis episodic with a strong emphasis on the early phase (fundamental research) and the last phase (scale-up),with relatively lower levels of funding for the entire intermediate phase. This issue was addressed by MIT’sJohn Preston in his 1993 congressional testimony (Preston 1993) which describes the different fundingmechanisms for creating new knowledge in environment, consumer electronics, autos, and utilities betweenthe United States and Japan. U.S. funding strongly supports the research phase but ignores intermediatework in the pilot and bench phases (and which may include technology transfer). The Preston report showsthat Japan funds less fundamental research and concentrates on the development, bench and pilot areas.Preston concludes that this has been Japan’s mechanism for gaining global predominance in the above-referenced fields (see Figures 7.1a and 7.1b).

(a) (b)

Fig. 7.1. (a) U.S. R&D spending; (b) Pacific Rim R&D spending relative to U.S. (J. Preston, MIT).


While the European Commission’s “collaboration in technology” development is of more recent vintage, theinstitutional process for collaboration and funding support throughout the technology development cycle hasbeen extensively practiced in most Scandinavian countries, the Netherlands and Germany. Examples forthese are the laboratories operated by the Netherlands Organization for Applied Scientific Research (TNO)and the Fraunhofer Gesellschaft (FhG) in Germany. The largest of these, the Fraunhofer group, consists ofmore than 45 institutes located at all major German universities. TNO and FhG are managed semi-autonomously, incorporate university and industrial staff, and provide fundamental understanding, prototypedevelopment, and technology transfer functions. Base funding from governments (30%) gives a continuousenabling support; prototype development combines governmental and private sector resources (30%); and thetechnology transfer activities (40%) are the sole responsibility of the private sector. Additional funding forscience and technology research is provided to all public universities and some private institutions. Hence,EU funding shows a strong commitment throughout the technology development cycle. Particular targetareas for the EU have been: communications, transportation, environmental remediation, machine tools andthe materials manufacturing industries. The EU has emerged as a strong, and in some cases a leading,technology provider in these fields. From the author’s perspective and in collaboration with several facultyat Bradley University, Figure 7.2 represents the situation in Germany, the Netherlands and Scandinavia.

Fig. 7.2. EU research funding.

As can be seen in the representations of the Japanese and EU funding models, the proof that scientific andengineering concepts work at bench, pilot, and production levels is viewed as an important research outcome.This optimizes the speed of implementation of the innovations. The U.S. model, which leaves this up to aneventual private sector activity, does not consider validation and proof as an integral part of the researchenterprise. Hence, in the U.S. more resources need to be allocated to the intermediate steps of the innovationprocess to be globally competitive.

Thus, the private sector in the EU and Japan is more fully integrated into publicly funded research programsthan is the case in the United States. Additionally, the EU and Japan have elevated research anddevelopment to ministerial status with an objective to complement the education, knowledge, and job-creating infrastructure. While the merits for permanent R&D tax credits have been subject to annual debatesin the United States, Japan and Europe have long recognized these R&D benefits to society and economiesand have established permanent R&D incentives and tax credits (Jernigan 1998).

While total U.S. governmental and private sector R&D funding exceeds that for the EU and Japan, the almostexclusively market focus, the lack of complete funding for the entire innovation process, and, in some cases,the limited relevance to societal needs, has made some of this U.S. work less noticeable. On the other hand,the focused EU and Japan effort, especially towards environmental objectives, has shown significant results.

EU Funding

Egon Wolff 119

EUROPEAN UNION AND JAPAN OVERVIEW

European Union

It is useful to examine the collaborative approaches utilized in the EU and Japan for transforming scientificand engineering knowledge into economic value. A review of different styles of interaction among theprivate sector, research entities and government is insightful and provides a basis for comparison.

An example of the education-research-innovation model that is more competitive is the “thematic networks”activity of the European Commission’s Industrial and Materials Technologies Program. Using education andresearch to stimulate innovation through thematic networks is seen as critical to the European Community,because it creates the critical mass of scientific and engineering personnel necessary to optimize the pace ofinnovation. The 100 networks operate in three general areas: production technologies, materials andtechnology for product innovation, and transportation technologies (see also chapter 3 of this report).

Examples of thematic networks at work were evident at the Technical University of Berlin, TechnicalUniversity-Aachen, and University of Stuttgart. There, faculty and researchers have teamed with engineersof the Fraunhofer Institutes, which are also managed by university faculty and private sector entities, toconcurrently address scale-up, technology transfer and demonstration issues.

According to Edith Cresson of the European Commission for Research, Innovation, Education, Training andYouth, “The overall aim of this initiative is to strengthen Europe’s R&D infrastructure. It has been achievedby the transfer of technology and know-how and by ensuring the needs of industry are widely understood andmet.” In addition, she noted, “From 1999, technical areas of Industrial and Materials Technologies programwill be absorbed into the thematic program: “competitive and sustainable growth.” This will supportresearch activities contributing to competitiveness and sustainability; its strategic approach will be basedupon the development of critical technologies and targeted platforms where project clustering will play animportant role.”

As explained in the European Commission Report A Road to European Cooperation, Industry and MaterialsTechnology Program, “Industry will not only have to identify areas for collaboration but also bring togetherand integrate activities—especially cross-sectoral projects along the value chain. The intention is to ensuremore efficient technology uptake and innovation across Europe. Coordination and pooling of resources willbe promoted between universities, research centers and companies with particular emphasis on small andmedium size enterprises. The aim is to achieve synergy and wider benefits around the objectives of the keyactions and generic technologies.”

Japan

The evolution of science and technology toward greater complexity, coupled with the fact that around theworld science and technology are now seen as tools for economic competition, has required that Japan’sresearchers focus on original research rather than translating the results from overseas research.

Beginning with the basic plan for science and technology in 1996 and the merger of the Ministry ofEducation with the Science and Technology Agency, Japan’s universities are expected to play the central rolein the new system of academic research and technology development. Note that most of the Japaneseresearch universities are public. For example, while most of the top 20 recipients of U.S. federal grants areprivate institutions, Keio University is the only non-public school in the top 20 recipients of science researchgrants from the Japanese Ministry of Education.

Where Japanese masters degree programs, as well as doctoral programs, were once organized mainly to trainacademic researchers, new institutes have in recent years been promoted with more practical goals. These areinstitutions in a different sense in that they include programs with courses aimed at supporting industry andtechnology (e.g., the University of Tsukuba and the University of the Air). At the Shonan Fujisawa Campusof Keio University, a department for comprehensive policy and environment information has beenestablished. Recent academic attention is given to improving graduate opportunities to fulfill the demand for


people with highly specialized knowledge and skills. In its 1991 report, the University Councilrecommended that the number of graduate schools be at least doubled by the year 2000.

OBSERVED AREAS OF EBM RESEARCH IN JAPAN AND THE EU

The following represent selected areas for EBM R&D that were seen and discussed by WTEC panelmembers:

• Soft materials, soft processing: University of Tokyo, IKP at University of Stuttgart, Dresden University,Hitachi PERL, Sony

• Non-traditional materials forming: IBF at University of Technology-Aachen, MITI (MEL), Toyo Seikan,Dresden University, Polyvinyl Chloride Industrial Association ( Japan)

• Material removal: MITI, EX-CELL-O, IBF at University of Technology-Aachen, Nagoya Institute ofTechnology, Nagoya University, Fraunhofer IPT (Aachen), Toyota

• Design for product disassembly, inverted manufacturing: MITI (MEL), Fraunhofer IZM (Berlin),University of Tokyo, Hitachi PERL

• Life-cycle analysis: MITI (NIRE), NEC, IKP at University of Stuttgart, Fraunhofer IZM (Berlin),Fraunhofer IPT (Aachen), University of Tokyo, Hitachi PERL

The site reports in appendixes C and D provide additional details. Note that research in Japan on invertedmanufacturing (University of Tokyo) and in Germany on life-cycle analysis (University of Stuttgart andFraunhofer IGB in Stuttgart) has revealed the challenges posed by complexity of environmental trade-offs.Consequently, significant efforts are underway to develop decision tools that include databases and newtechnologies (alternatives) for existing processes. (The author has also visited Dresden University, and hasincluded Dresden in the above list, where appropriate.)

In comparison, the Department of Energy’s industrial road maps provide a good basis for a U.S. EBM R&Deffort and, in some cases, a basis for international collaboration. While this effort accepts a businessconsideration for the development of alternative processes, it fails to stress the development of life-cycleanalysis (LCA) tools for EBM for the entire product development chain.

Discussions with European and Japanese government leaders, university faculty, developmental laboratorystaff and private sector managers all concluded that without pooling and integrating the resources of theuniversities, research centers, government and private sector companies, results for society and sustainabilitywill fall short of intended goals.

FINDINGS

Having compared the EBM research strategies of the European community, Japan and United States, thedifferences may be described as well-coordinated and focused within the EU and Japan, and seemingly adhoc in the United States. That is, in terms of solving the larger problems of society—in this caseenvironmental problems—the almost exclusive market orientation of U.S. activities makes them appeardisorganized and unfocused.

The EU and Japanese efforts contain directions, scope and goals involving all segments of society to achievethe EBM objectives; collaboration and consensus is the predominant enabler in these countries. UnitedStates EBM research efforts, on the other hand, are disconnected and rarely involve all parties. Furthermore,when described by some companies, it is difficult to do research in the current regulatory environment due toconcerns about liability.

While U.S. EBM efforts are mainly initiated for global competitiveness by international corporations, theuniversity segment remains a distant player and lacks the governmental funding support so prevalent in theEU and Japan. Meeting global environmental challenges will require new modes of diplomacy, new ways to

Egon Wolff 121

stimulate technological innovation, and the inclusion of new participants at all levels in the decision-makingprocesses (ACP 2000).

The United States can learn from Europe and Japan if it wants to be a relevant participant, contributor, andbeneficiary from global environmental remediation. Efforts by National Science Foundation and Departmentof Energy program directors to develop a focused U.S. EBM research platform involving university andprivate sector are significant steps. The Department of Energy roadmaps involving primary manufacturing ofmaterials commodities need to be expanded to involve materials transformation, joining, and re-manufacturing, in the broad areas listed below:

• Materials processing (metals/polymer)

• Thermal processes (heat treat/stress relief/curing)

• Joining (welding/bonding)

• Machining

• Remanufacturing processes

• Cleaning

• Dismantling

• Remaining life determination

• Reconditioning

• Surface engineering for enhanced durability

• Surface protection, i.e., coatings, paints, etc.

• Wear and tribology knowledge

• Life-cycle analysis with business/value attributes

• In-process sensor capability to modify/correct process deficiencies

• Foundry emission reduction (sand and binder waste)

• Methods of removing contaminants and trace elements from recycled alloys

• Methods of economically recovering and reprocessing composite materials

• Development of true net-shape metal casting and forging methods

• Methods of recycling and recovering alloys in engineered materials

• Evaluation of recyclability of materials and new materials systems

REFERENCES

Akito, A. 2000. Uni reform. Look Japan. May.

Aspen Institute Congressional Program (AIC). 2000. Convergence of U.S. National Security and the GlobalEnvironment. February.

European Commission. 1998. Industrial Technologies; Impact Predicted-Impact Delivered. European CommissionReport.

European Commission. 1999. A Road to European Cooperation; Thematic Network Activity. European Commission forResearch, Innovation, Education, Training and Youth Report.

Gunner, J. and R. Moreland. 2000. Policy, the European Union and Global Climate Change. June.

Jernigan, C. 1998. Beyond High Tech Survival. ISBN 0-9655769-1-4.

Landau, Taylor, and Wright. 1996. Securing America’s Strength. National Research Council. ISBN 309-06448-1.

Mitsuhashi, T. 1999. Zero hour: targeting a waste-free society. Look Japan. May.

Preston, J. 1993. Testimony before the Energy Subcommittee of the House Space, Science and Technology Committee.March 23.

Schumpeter, J. A. 1950. Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy. New York: Harper & Brothers. Enlarged 3rd Edition.

Shinichi, Y. 2000. Japanese universities aim to outshine the competition. Look Japan. May.


123

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A. BIOGRAPHIES OF PANEL MEMBERS

Name: Dr. Timothy G. Gutowski (Panel Chair)

Address: Professor of Mechanical EngineeringDirector, Laboratory for Manufacturing and ProductivityMassachusetts Institute of Technology77 Massachusetts Avenue, Room 35-234Cambridge, MA 02139

Dr. Timothy G. Gutowski is a Professor of Mechanical Engineering and Director of the Laboratory forManufacturing and Productivity (LMP) at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. The LMP isresponsible for manufacturing development, including manufacturing process and system design, control,analysis and optimization. He has also been Director of the MIT-Industry Composites and PolymerProcessing Program, 1984-93, and is currently the Co-Lead of Factory Operations for the MIT Lean AircraftInitiative.

Dr. Gutowski has over 100 technical publications, including seven patents, in such areas as advancedcomposites processing, polymer processing, new process development, design for manufacturing, costestimating, physical chemistry, and acoustics and vibration. He and his students have developed several newprocesses for the forming of advanced composites for aerospace applications. He has also developed newtheories for the consolidation of composites and the mapping of fiber assemblies onto complex shapes. Hismost recent book, Advanced Composites Manufacturing, was published by John Wiley in 1997. Dr.Gutowski is the North American Editor for the international journal Composites, Part A Applied Science andManufacturing, and he is an Associate Editor for the Journal of Manufacturing Systems.

He held the Alcoa Professorship at MIT from 1985 to 1992, and in 1989 was named an MIT Leader forManufacturing Professor.

Name: Cynthia F. Murphy (Panel Co-chair)

Address: Research Scientist, Center for Energy and Environmental ResourcesUniversity of Texas at Austin (R7100)10100 Burnet Road., Bldg. 133Austin, TX 78758

Ms. Murphy is currently a research scientist at the Center for Energy and Environmental Resources,University of Texas at Austin. She has been the Principal Investigator for two projects attempting to advanceelectronic products recycling in the context of an eco-industrial park. The focus of both projects is toevaluate material streams associated with these products, including metals, thermoplastics, and leaded glass.This is being done through the development of activity-based process and logistics models that address cost,quality, and environmental metrics. She is also the Principal Investigator for an NSF/EPA project incooperation with Motorola and SEMATECH to develop generic LCI modules for the semiconductorindustry.

Prior to joining the University of Texas, Ms. Murphy was a Senior Member of Technical Staff and ProjectLeader in Environmental Programs at the Microelectronics and Computer Technology Corp. (MCC) inAustin, TX. She was the project manager and/or technical lead on numerous projects at MCC, including“Making Design for Environment and Life-cycle Assessment Work,” and “Revolutionary EnvironmentalManufacture of Printed Wiring Boards,” a $7.3 million project involving six industry partners. In addition,she contributed to the Electronic Products Environmental Roadmap (1996). Ms. Murphy has 10 years of

Appendix A. Biographies of Panel Members124

experience in the area of cost-modeling, process-modeling, and materials inventory modeling for the purposeof performing tradeoff analyses and optimization for various sectors of the electronics industry. Herbackground includes manufacture and test of semiconductors and printed wiring boards, and advancedelectronic packaging and assembly technologies.

Ms. Murphy’s research interests include design for environment, life-cycle assessment, environmentallyconscious manufacturing, process modeling of manufacturing processes, and economic and environmentaltradeoff analyses. She has numerous publications.

Name: Dr. David T. Allen

Address: Henry Beckman Professor in Chemical Engineering University of Texas at AustinChemical Engineering Bldg., 3.462Austin, TX 78712-1062

Dr. David Allen is Beckman Professor of Chemical Engineering and Director of the Center for Energy andEnvironmental Resources at the University of Texas at Austin. Prior to joining the faculty at the Universityof Texas, Dr. Allen was Professor and Chairman of the Chemical Engineering Department at the Universityof California, Los Angeles. His research interests lie in environmental reaction engineering, particularlyissues related to air quality and pollution prevention. He is the author of three books and over 100 papers inthese areas, and the quality of his research has been recognized by the National Science Foundation throughthe Presidential Young Investigator Award and the AT&T Foundation through an award in IndustrialEcology. Dr. Allen is also active in developing pollution prevention education materials for engineeringcurricula, and his teaching has been recognized through UCLA's Excellence in Engineering Teaching Award.

Dr. Allen received his BS degree in Chemical Engineering, with distinction, from Cornell University in 1979.His MS and PhD degrees in Chemical Engineering were awarded by the California Institute of Technology in1981 and 1983. He has held visiting faculty appointments at the California Institute of Technology and theDepartment of Energy.

Name: Dr. Diana J. Bauer

Address: U.S. Environmental Protection AgencyNational Center for Environmental Research (NCER)1200 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W., 8722RWashington, DC 20460

Dr. Diana Bauer is currently serving as a AAAS Fellow at the Environmental Projection Agency inWashington, DC. She received her PhD in mechanical engineering with a specialization in environmentallyconscious design and manufacturing from UC Berkeley in 1999. Before returning to graduate school shespent several years in industry, first developing computer models in the Systems and Design IntegrationGroup at Foster Miller, Inc., and later conceptualizing new CAD product ideas in the Product PlanningGroup at Parametric Technology Corporation. She has also lived and traveled extensively in Asia, includingtwo months in 1998 based at MEL in Tsukuba researching Japanese industry and the environment. Herresearch interests include process-level environmental evaluation of manufacturing, tools to supportenvironmental decision making in design and manufacturing, and international comparisons ofenvironmentally conscious design and manufacturing activities and motivations.

Appendix A. Biographies of Panel Members 125

Name: Dr. Bert Bras

Address: Associate ProfessorGeorgia Institute of TechnologyThe George W. Woodruff School of Mechanical EngineeringSystems Realization LaboratoryAtlanta, GA 30332-0405

Dr. Bert Bras has been Associate Professor at the George W. Woodruff School of Mechanical Engineering atthe Georgia Institute of Technology since September 1992. His research focus is on environmentallyconscious design and manufacturing, design for de- and remanufacture, activity-based life-cycle assessments,and industrial ecology. His primary research interest is how to reduce the environmental impact of companieswhile increasing their competitiveness, i.e., how to promote sustainable development. He has receivedfunding and donations from the National Science Foundation, the Georgia Research Alliance, the Center forSustainable Technology, AT&T, Motorola, Ford Electronics, the Army Environmental Policy Institute, andDaimlerChrysler for his research. He has authored and co-authored over 60 publications. He has developedand taught an undergraduate course on Environmentally Conscious Design & Manufacturing since 1993 andhas developed a curriculum in Sustainable Development with colleagues from other engineering schools andpublic policy. He also taught segments of a National Center for Advanced Technologies (NCAT) shortcourse on Integrated Product and Process Development for the Army and for the U.S. Navy. He has wonGeorgia Tech’s 1995 Amoco and Center for Enhancement of Teaching and Learning Young FacultyTeaching Award, was named the 1996 Engineer of the Year in Education by the Georgia Society ofProfessional Engineers, and received a NSF Young Faculty Career Award in 1996, and a Society ofAutomotive Engineers Ralph R. Teetor Award in 1999.

Dr. Bras obtained his Master of Science (“Ingenieur”) degree in Mechanical Engineering from the Universityof Twente, The Netherlands, in August 1987. After completion of his MS thesis he was hired as a full timeresearch associate at the Maritime Research Institute Netherlands’ (MARIN) Design Research Departmentand sponsored by MARIN to complete PhD study in the U.S. He obtained his Doctor of Philosophy degreein Operations Research from the University of Houston in May 1992. Upon completion of his PhD, hereceived a Post-Doctoral grant from the Institute of Space Systems and Operations at the University ofHouston.

Name: Dr. Thomas S. Piwonka

Address: Director, Metal Casting Technology CenterUniversity of Alabama106 Bevill Building, P.O. Box 870201Tuscaloosa, AL 35487

Dr. Piwonka is Director of the Metal Casting Technology Center and Acting Director of the MarineTransportation Center at the University of Alabama in Tuscaloosa, AL. Prior to joining the university, Dr.Piwonka spent 25 years in the metalcasting industry, at the General Motors Corporation, Kelsey-Hayes Corp,and TRW Inc. He has held a variety of positions in the cast metals industry, ranging from productionengineer to research director. He is a graduate of Case-Western Reserve University, and received hisadvanced degrees from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Dr. Piwonka is a member of the American Foundrymen’s Society, The Minerals, Metals and MaterialsSociety, ASM International, and the Investment Casting Institute. He is a member of the Advisory TechnicalAwareness Council of ASM International, is on the Editorial Board of the International Journal of CastMetals Research, and was on the editorial board of Metals Handbook, Desk Edition–Second Edition. He hasauthored more than 80 technical papers on foundry technology and has seven patents in the field of metalcasting. He is a member of the Process Design & Modeling, Aerospace Structural Casting, Aluminum Gatingand Risering, Mold-Metal Interface and Green Sand Committees, and the Steel Division at AFS, and isProgram Manager for the Thin Wall Iron Casting Program at AFS, and the Maritime Administration’s HighSpeed Sealift Program.

Appendix A. Biographies of Panel Members126

Dr. Piwonka’s research interests include alloy solidification, non-ferrous foundry processes, manufacturingprocessing of superalloys, mold making science and technology and manufacturing systems. He teachescourses in non-ferrous metalcasting, high temperature alloys, materials processing and powder metallurgy.

Name: Dr. Paul Sheng

Address: Associate PrincipalMcKinsey and Co., Inc.111 Congress Avenue, Suite 2100Austin, TX 78701

Dr. Paul Sheng has recently moved to a position with McKinsey & Company, from his previous post at UCBerkeley. His research interests are in environmentally conscious processing and planning, particularly inmachining and electronics manufacturing. He has co-authored over 90 journal and conference publicationson environment and manufacturing topics. Dr. Sheng is the recipient of the Office of Naval Research YoungInvestigator Award, Society of Manufacturing Engineering Young Engineer Award, NAMRI OutstandingPaper Award, Japan-USA Flexible Automation Young Investigator Award, and the Lucent TechnologyIndustrial Ecology Faculty Fellowship. He is currently a corresponding member of the CIRP.

Dr. Sheng received his SB, SM and PhD degrees in mechanical engineering from MIT. Prior to joining thefaculty at Berkeley, he served as Sr. Project Engineer on the Advanced Manufacturing Staff of GeneralMotors Corporation.

Name: Dr. John W. Sutherland

Address: Professor, Dept. of Mechanical Engineering-Engineering MechanicsMichigan Technological University815 R.L. Smith ME-EM Building1400 Townsend DriveHoughton, MI 49931-1295

Dr. John W. Sutherland is presently Professor and Associate Chair in the Dept. of ME-EM at MichiganTechnological University. He received his BS, MS, and PhD degrees from the University of Illinois atUrbana-Champaign. Previously, he held an adjunct faculty position at the University of Illinois and servedas a manufacturing consultant. He has published over 100 technical papers in various journals andconference proceedings. He is a member of the Board of Directors and the Scientific Committee of the NorthAmerican Manufacturing Research Institution of SME, and serves on the Executive Committee of ASME'sManufacturing Engineering Division. Professor Sutherland has received numerous teaching awards, SME'sOutstanding Young Manufacturing Engineer Award (1992), Presidential Early Career Award for Scientistsand Engineering (1996), and SAE's Ralph R. Teetor Award (1999).

Name: Dr. Deborah L. Thurston

Address: Professor of General EngineeringDirector, Decision Systems LaboratoryDepartment of General EngineeringUniversity of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign117 Transportation Building104 South Mathews AvenueUrbana, IL 61801

Dr. Deborah L. Thurston is Director of the Decision Systems Laboratory at the University of Illinois atUrbana-Champaign, where she conducts research in multiobjective engineering design decision making. Sheis a Professor of General Engineering, and also holds appointments in the Civil and EnvironmentalEngineering Department, and in the Mechanical and Industrial Engineering Department.

The focus of her research is on developing new methods for integrating environmental impacts, productioncosts, product performance and quality into concurrent design and manufacturing analysis. She has published

Appendix A. Biographies of Panel Members 127

over 70 technical papers. Her research has been funded by the National Science Foundation, Chrysler,General Motors, Ford, Motorola, Hayes-Lemmerz, Hewlett-Packard, Sun, Armstrong World Industries,Prefinish Metals, Nestle, Illinois Department of Natural Resources, and EPRI.

She received the prestigious Presidential Young Investigator Award from the National Science Foundation in1989, the Xerox Award for excellence in engineering research in 1992 and 1995, three awards for excellencein undergraduate advising, and a 1994 Best Paper of the Year Award for The Engineering Economist.Professor Thurston currently serves as an Area Editor for The Engineering Economist, and as past AssociateTechnical Editor in Design Theory and Methodology for the Transactions of the American Society ofMechanical Engineers: Journal of Mechanical Design. She is a registered professional engineer and amember of ASEE, ASME, IEEE and IIE.

She earned the MS and PhD degrees from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) in 1984 and1987, respectively. After obtaining the BS degree in Civil Engineering from the University of Minnesota in1978, she worked for the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency for four years.

Name: Egon E. Wolff

Address: Director, International Materials and Component ResearchCaterpillar Inc.Technical Center, Bldg. K, P. O. Box 1875Peoria, IL 61656-1875

Egon Wolff’s career at Caterpillar started in 1967 as a Project Engineer for large off-highway vehicles. Heserved as a Technical Resources and Development Manager in the United States and Brazil before taking theposition as Director, International Materials and Component Research.

His work focuses on developing and acquiring emerging technologies from universities and institutions,research funded by agencies of government, and through the creation of technology ventures. He has formedpartnerships with more than 20 international institutions and specifically focused on technology transfer as ameans to improve the discovery process for increased implementation. He earned degrees in MaterialsScience and Engineering in Germany and is a Professor for Engineering and Technology at BradleyUniversity.

128

APPENDIX B. BIOGRAPHIES OF OTHER TEAM MEMBERS

Name: Delcie R. Durham, Ph.D., PE

Address: Program Director, Design and Manufacturing Research GroupNational Science Foundation4201 Wilson Blvd., Room 565Arlington, VA 22230

Dr. Durham is Program Director for the Materials Processing and Manufacturing Program in the EngineeringDirectorate at the National Science Foundation. This program sponsors research in novel materialsprocessing, including nanotechnologies, microfabrication, and plasma deposition processes. The programalso funds research in modeling and simulation of netshape processes such as casting, forming, polymercomposites and thin films for predictability and improved productivity. Many of the awards are directedtowards environmentally conscious manufacturing. Dr. Durham was previously at the University ofVermont, where she was Associate Professor of Mechanical Engineering and Materials Science, and alsoserved as Dean of the Graduate College. Dr. Durham has served on the Board of the North AmericanManufacturing Research Institute of the Society of Manufacturing Engineers, including President in 1995.She is a member of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers, and is currently a member of theExecutive Committee of the Manufacturing Engineering Division. Dr. Durham is a registered ProfessionalEngineer in the State of Vermont and has worked as a consultant for numerous industries.

Name: Mr. Hiroshi Morishita

Address: HMI CorporationMatsudo Paresu 100235-2 KoyamaMatsudo 271, JAPAN

Hiroshi Morishita, President, HMI Corporation, specializes in ultra-micro manipulation technology forMEMS (microelectromechanical systems). He founded HMI Corporation in 1991 to commercialize his ultra-micro manipulator system. He extended his interest and business to the field of archaeological excavatingand to the new robot manipulator system to help bed-ridden persons. In 1994, he became a consultant toWTEC for study tours in Japan. He graduated from the University of Tokyo (BA, MA, mechanicalengineering), and is in the final stage of preparing his doctoral thesis. He was a visiting researcher in theUniversity of Tokyo’s Mechanical Engineering Department in 1992-93 and at RCAST (the Research Centerfor Advanced Science and Technology) at the University of Tokyo in 1994-95.

Name: Dr. K.P. Rajurkar

Address: Program Director, Manufacturing Machines & Equipment GroupNational Science Foundation4201 Wilson Blvd., Room 565Arlington, VA 22230

Dr. K.P. Rajurkar is Program Director for the Manufacturing Machines & Equipment Program in theEngineering Directorate at the National Science Foundation. He received his BS degree with honors fromJabalpur University, India. He received his MS and PhD degrees from Michigan Technological University in1978 and 1982, respectively.

Dr. Rajurkar is the founder of the Center for Nontraditional Manufacturing Research of the College ofEngineering and Technology, University of Nebraska-Lincoln. In the past he has worked as AssociateProfessor at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln and as Assistant Professor at Michigan TechnologicalUniversity. Dr. Rajurkar is a member of ASME, SME and a corresponding member of CIRP. Dr. Rajurkarserves as a reviewer for several professional journals including Trans. ASME, Journal of Manufacturing

Appendix B. Biographies of Other Team Members 129

Science and Engineering; Trans. ASME, Journal of Engineering Materials and Technology; the ASM Journalof Shaping Technology; International Journal of Electro-Machining; Wear; and others. Dr. Rajurkar servedas an Associate Editor of the ASME Journal of Engineering for Industry and Chairman of the ScientificCommittee of the NAMRI/SME. He is the President-Elect of the North American Manufacturing ResearchInstitute of SME.

Dr. Rajurkar has more than 90 refereed publications and nearly 100 technically edited papers which werepublished in conference proceedings. He has authored many technical reports and has made severalunpublished presentations. Dr. Rajurkar has participated in numerous seminars, workshops, andcurricular/lab development activities. He has been successful in attracting research grants from NSF,NIST/ATP, DOD, GEAE, Extrude Hone, Brush Wellman, Cummins Engines, NCMS, Mitsubishi ElectricCorporation (Japan), Trans Tec Inc. (England), State of Nebraska, and other sponsors. He has receivedCollege of Engineering and Technology Awards for research and teaching. He also has received the ASMEBlackall Machine Tool and Gage Award for a paper on Pulse Electrochemical Machining. Recently hispatent on cryogenically cooled tool machining has been approved.

His areas of teaching experience include undergraduate and graduate courses in manufacturing methods andprocesses, metal cutting theory and practice, nontraditional manufacturing methods, computer aidedmanufacturing, numerical control and automation, robotics, applied operation research, production planning,statics, dynamics, strength of materials, statistical experimental design, and modeling of manufacturingprocesses and systems.

Name: Dr. A. Frederick Thompson, PE

Address: Program Director, Environmental TechnologyNational Science Foundation4201 Wilson Blvd., Room 565Arlington, VA 22230

Dr. Fred Thompson joined the National Science Foundation in 1997 after 28 years in the environmentalconsulting and construction industry. He has broad experience in all phases of environmental engineering andmanagement, and his activities have included all media, including air, water, wastewater, and solid andhazardous wastes. He has been a consultant to industry and to municipal, state and federal governmentagencies as they solved existing environmental problems or established programs and plans to avoid futurepollution. His experience includes a three-year assignment in Milan, Italy, where he served industrial clientsthroughout Europe. Dr. Thompson earned his BS in Engineering Science from the Pennsylvania StateUniversity (1963) and his MS (1965) and PhD (1968) in Environmental Health Engineering from theCalifornia Institute of Technology. He is a registered professional engineer in Pennsylvania, Maryland andVirginia.

At NSF, he directs the Environmental Technology element of the Environmental/Ocean Systems Program inthe Division of Bioengineering and Environmental Systems. This program element focuses on technologiesto prevent the formation and discharge of pollutants and to avoid environmental harm.

130

APPENDIX C. SITE REPORTS—EUROPE

Site: DaimlerChrysler AGEpplestrasse 225Stuttgart-MöhringenGermany

Date: April 6, 2000

WTEC Attendees: T. Piwonka (report author), B. Bras, D. Durham, T. Gutowski, R. Horning, C. Murphy,D. Thurston

Hosts: Dr. Eberhard BesseyDr. Franz-Josef EckerMr. Joachim Diener

INTRODUCTION

DaimlerChrysler personnel reviewed the company’s efforts in the environmental area. The company issuesan annual environmental report, which now includes all of the corporation’s operations, e.g., Mercedes-Benz,Chrysler, Dasa, debis, and the rest. After the merger with Chrysler, they had to integrate the two differingenvironmental policies. The Board of Directors has issued a six-point series of objectives. All operations arenow implementing these objectives.

EBM ACTIVITIES

Two years ago Daimler toured the world benchmarking the best environmental management practices. Along-time goal of DaimlerChrysler is zero waste. Today, 97% of their waste can be recycled by means ofeither material or thermal recycling; only 3% must be landfilled. The amount of non-recyclable wasteproduced per Mercedes-Benz car is 21 kg. They have put their automotive designers under pressure toproduce an environmentally acceptable car. This is in addition to the other pressures on the designers, such asthe European take-back laws now in effect. These require that 75% of each car (by weight) must berecyclable for 2001 cars (increasing to 95% in ten years), and fuel economy must increase by 40% by 2006.(They believe that the technology exists to accomplish these goals but that it is not currently commercial.) Inaddition, the development time of new Mercedes-Benz models has been decreased substantially, to 36months.

To respond to these pressures they have established dismantling centers in Germany for rebuildingcomponents for the used car and warranty markets. Their international engine recycling center is in Berlin.They noted that, without end-of-life take-back laws, recycling would be profitable only for high value parts,such as engines and electric generators. There have also been setbacks: companies that invested in therecycling of electronic components before take-back laws existed went bankrupt (except in Holland, whichalready had those laws).

DaimlerChrysler is currently in the process of integrating the environmental policies of Daimler and Chryslerinto one corporate approach. However, they acknowledge that the two political approaches to environmentalissues are different. In Germany there is great concern over fuel economy and greenhouse gases, while in theU.S. there is more concern about emissions and soil pollution. They note that their German practice ofactively helping their suppliers to become leaders in environmentally benign manufacturing practices wouldnot work in the United States because of the possibility of litigation if the practices did not work as planned.Although they do not currently require their suppliers to be ISO 14000 compliant, they are discussing thepossibility of so doing, and, in Germany, will help the supplier achieve that goal.

Appendix C. Site Reports—Europe 131

They recognize the financial burden of ISO certification to small and medium size enterprises, such as theirsuppliers, and mentioned that ISO 18000, on worker safety, is likely to come next. They would prefer to seeone overall certification, covering ISO 9000, 14000 and 18000, instead of three different ones. They expecttheir Tier 1 suppliers to be pushing ISO 14000 compliance down to their suppliers.

In Europe, their plants are EMAS and ISO 14000 compliant, and the plants are expected to work actively onenvironmental issues. They emphasized that the effectiveness of ISO 14000 depends on the people in theplants. The ISO 14000 plans drawn up for each plant are the responsibility of that plant. Corporateheadquarters reviews each plant’s performance each year. This is not just an assessment of the technical datain each plant, but also of the management of each plant.

In product design, they have had for some time a team assigned to each product. Each member of the designteam is responsible for incorporation of design for the environment (DFE) principles. Each designmodification must go through “gates” (cost, performance, etc.) to make it to the next level successfully, andDFE considerations must also make it through the gates. They are in the process of integrating DFEprocedures between U.S. and European operations. Additionally there are so-called “black” and “gray” listsof materials, indicating substances not tolerated in manufacture, or tolerated in restricted use only until thereis an environmentally benign substitute.

They are trying to reduce the number of different materials used in their products, and the number ofdifferent manufacturing operations used. Thus, they view net-shape casting as a manufacturing method of thefuture, because it cuts down on the number of components. They have a methodology for DFE that includesLCA and design for cost. One measure is the use of “Ecopoint” lists. Among their goals are: reduce numberof components, reduce number of materials, use compatible plastics, use snap locks instead of screws, etc.

They have developed a method of dry machining and have reduced the use of coolant from 3000 l/hr to 20ml/hr. This depends on tool material and geometry. Chip removal was a problem, as was built-up edge. Theynoted that any environmental advance must also be able to produce the same quality product at the same orlower cost.

DaimlerChrysler has had an extensive program to develop natural fibers for use in fiber-reinforced plasticcomponents in their vehicles. In this process they use, among other things, sisal and flax instead of glassfibers, which reduces vehicle weight and increases recyclability of the composites. They discovered that it isvery important to analyze the complete process chain from the field (crops) to the final automobile part. Theyhad to learn about the effect of weather conditions, post-harvest processing, drying conditions, etc., on theproperties of the fibers. They also had to establish an infrastructure to move the fibers from the farm to thecomposite manufacturing plant, and to guarantee consistency in fiber performance. This included helpingtheir suppliers design processing parameters and equipment. The project resulted in cost reductions of up to30% in some components, and weight reductions of up to 30%. No carbon dioxide emissions are involved.

Research and development departments have to transfer technology they develop to business divisions.Research has the responsibility of developing processes for competitiveness and sustainability.

DaimlerChrysler has considered what an ideal product mix would be. They also have considered being asupplier of mobility, i.e., owning the vehicles they produce and leasing them to customers (30% of their carsand 70% of their SMART vehicle, a two seater car marketed only in Europe, are leased today). They haveused LCA as a decision support tool in discussing environmental regulations with legislators. An examplecited was the use of solvent-based paints, vs. solvent-based paints with air cleaners, vs. water-based paintsfor their vehicles. In this case none of the choices was optimum. They therefore initiated the development ofan entirely new powder/slurry technique.

They did note that currently no car can be imported into certain European countries if it is more than fiveyears old. Before this law was enacted, a lot of their vehicles were ending up there in response to the need forreliable used personal transportation.

Appendix C. Site Reports—Europe132

One other item of note: the roofs of the buildings at DaimlerChrysler headquarters are planted with grass.The grass and soil act as insulation during the year, decreasing heating and cooling costs and the energy theyrequire.


Site: Delft University of Technology (TU Delft)Jaffalaan 92628 BX DelftThe Netherlands

Date visited: April 3, 2000

WTEC attendees: B. Bras (report author), R. Horning, C. Murphy, D. Thurston

Hosts Prof. Ab Stevels (part-time faculty as well as Senior Advisor, EnvironmentalEngineering, Philips)

Dr. Henk Strietman (Coordinator, Sustainable Product Development, Ministry ofHousing, Spatial Planning and the Environment)

Dr. Harry te Riele, MSc (STORRM C.S.)Dr. Ir. Menno Nagel (Lucent Technologies)Catherine Ross, Casper Boks, Jeroen Rombouts, Piet Huizinga (PhD students)

DESIGN FOR SUSTAINABILITY PROGRAM AT TU DELFT

Dr. Stevels provided a presentation about the history of the Delft University of Technology, as well ascurrent environmental activities. Delft University of Technology was founded in 1842, contains sevenfaculties with 15 programs, and has 14,000 students. The major programs are Architecture, Industrial DesignEngineering, Mechanical Engineering and Aerospace Engineering. There are also large faculties inEngineering Physics, Chemistry, Electrotechnical Engineering, and Technical Management.

Design for Sustainability activities are in two areas:

• Design for Sustainability (DFS) program of the faculty of Design, Construction, and Production(“OCP”) focusing on eco-design methodology and management, as well as Design for SustainableServices-Product Combination.

• Smart Product Design, an interdisciplinary effort with cooperation of faculties of Earth Sciences,Industrial Design, Aerospace Design. The design of an electric/hybrid vehicle is a focus project.

The DFS program has been active since the late eighties and early nineties. It currently has three fullprofessors, five assistant professors and 15 PhD students. One of its first accomplishments was the Promiseeco-design cases and UNEP manual on eco-design developed under the guidance of Prof. Han Brezet in1992. Now, about 130 graduation projects have been done in industry worldwide. Examples of collaborationwith industrial partners include Philips (Chair on Environmental Aspects of Electronics), Unilever(packaging design), Shell (new services, scenarios), Atag (energy intelligent kitchen), Ahrend-KPNconsortium (sustainable workplace), DAF Trucks (eco-design intranet tool, POEMS). The annual budget forthe DFS program is about two million Dutch Guilders (almost one million U.S. dollars) of which 70% comesfrom internal university funding.

Stevels started the discussion by providing what he called provocative statements from personal observationsand experience:

• Eco-design needs tailor-made solutions (nothing is generic).

• Eco-design has to be put into perspective. Its success or failure depends on other issues, such as internalcircumstances (organizational culture), how the business is doing, external pressure (governmentpressure is not really an issue for a multi-national), and product and process characteristics.

• Design for “X” is crap, especially design for disassembly.


• Idea generation is more important than validation (e.g., by life-cycle analysis).

• Eco-labels are counter-productive. (This sparked a discussion among the Dutch delegates. Strietmanstated that although the eco-label itself may not be good, the process behind obtaining an eco-label isdefinitely very worthwhile. Stevels suggested that eco-labels should be transformed into anenvironmental care system where the processes around eco-design are managed. The Dutch eco-label iscalled “milieukeur” which stands for environmental certificate.)

CONSUMER BEHAVIOR, NEW TAX LAW, DRIVERS

The behavior of consumers was also a topic of discussion. Stevels suggested that Europeans have the samebuying behavior as in the U.S.: about 25% are environmentally concerned, 50% are neutral, and 25% arenegative towards the environment in terms of behavior. Te Riele felt that much of this depends on thenetwork and public awareness as well as shock effect of environmental issues. He added that in theNetherlands, consumers can choose to buy “Green Energy,” that is, energy generated from alternativesources (wind, solar, etc.). Even though the energy costs per kWh are higher for consumers, the demand forthis type of energy is going up. A fundamental question for Te Riele is when a system (in this case consumerbehavior) starts to move. Te Riele suggested that sometimes a nucleus can cause a complete societal change.A significant problem currently is the enormous economic wealth in the Netherlands and other Westerncountries. The rebound of the economy has resulted in the fact that there is too much money to spend. Thisresults in more environmental impact.

The Dutch government has made a very significant move to influence consumer behavior by adopting a newtax system. In the new system, taxes on labor, income, etc., will be reduced. However, the tax on materialbased systems will be raised. The intent is to have tax system that will reward low (natural) resourceconsumption. This new system will go into effect January 1, 2001. This change of the tax system had wide-ranging support in the Dutch Parliament, from both government and opposition parties.

When asked about the drivers for these far-reaching environmental efforts in the Netherlands, Strietmanexplained that many were historical. In the 1960-1970s the Dutch had severe air, water, and waste pollutionproblems. Furthermore, the Netherlands has historically had a lot of environmental pressure groups.Strietman also pointed out that the Dutch have a lot of positive notions about the environment. Part of themotivation also stems from religious notions that humans are supposed to be good caretakers of God’screation.

INDUSTRY-GOVERNMENT COLLABORATION

Strietman explained that in 1989 a shift occurred in the approach taken by the Dutch Ministry ofEnvironment (the equivalent of the U.S. EPA), to an industry-sector-based approach rather than a media (air,water, land) based approach. Furthermore, the Ministry of Economic Affairs started to cooperate directlywith the Ministry of Environment. The result is that in governmental policy making the correlation betweeneconomic and environmental issues is much better understood and managed. The collaboration between theDutch Ministries is referred to as the “polder model.” The name signifies that 50% of the Netherlands liesbelow sea level, and if the Dutch do not collaborate, the consequences of environmental problems aresignificant. This strong collaboration between government and industry is rather unique. Asked aboutinspection, Strietman said that the Ministry of Environment does have an inspection department. However,he added, companies are doing a lot of self-policing because a case of bad publicity related to one companycan quickly affect the whole industry group. Also, the environmental inspections are not geared towardsfining a company, but rather are goal oriented and focused on the question “What are you going to improve?”In this way, a positive atmosphere of collaboration between government and industry has been created. (SeeSilent Revolution… for more details on this approach.)

Given the high level of environmental awareness, the issue of how foreign companies and imports arehandled was raised. According to the Dutch, imports are an issue. Stevels argued that the GATT agreementsshould have a minimum of environmental agreements included. He is also very fed up with the attitudes ofsome foreign companies (especially U.S. companies) towards environmental issues. Philips has the same


environmental standards worldwide. Related to exports, Te Riele pointed out that Third World countries willnot necessarily go through similar environmental problems as the developed countries because the ThirdWorld can buy much better equipment and catch-up much faster.

LUCENT ON SUPPLIER CERTIFICATION

Mr. Nagels provided an overview of the supplier certification system that he employs within LucentTechnologies in the Netherlands.

If you ask structural questions, then the supplier responds very conscientiously and will provide accuratedata. Lucent is very open about why and how it is using the surveys. Lucent also handles all dataconfidentially.

The surveys are used in price negotiations. Initially, this was a surprise for U.S. colleagues of Mr. Nagels.They thought that it was “merely” an environmental survey to satisfy some customer request.

Nagel advises that you should organize your process well and do it from a strategic viewpoint. He stronglydiscourages the practice of sending lists of regulated substances around which he feels are too much actiondriven. In his opinion, when environment is not integrated into the business, it will not work. Environmentalissues should be made practical and measurable.

The trend is “outsource what you can outsource,” but Nagel believes that the pendulum may swing back onthis. A negative aspect of outsourcing is that it increases ones supply chain and decreases the (internal)knowledge base.

Lucent uses two approaches in its supplier certifications:

• A relative-zero approach

• An absolute approach

The relative-zero approach is basically a benchmarking approach and focuses on the efficiency of convertingraw materials into products. Efficiency is measured per kilogram product. This approach basically asks thesuppliers to set up a mass and energy balance of their operations. It considers base materials, auxiliary(process) materials, water, energy, and packaging as inputs, and emission (air, water, waste) and products asoutputs of a manufacturing operation. The goal is to minimize all inputs and emissions, while maximizing theamount of product.

The absolute approach uses the Eco-Indicator metric to obtain a single number for environmental impact.Lucent provides suppliers guidance on necessary level of detail.

Both approaches are performed simultaneously and result in a numeric score that can be used to differentiatesupplier performance. Based on the suppliers’ reported value(s), Lucent ranks the suppliers into categories.

FUTURE ISSUES

When asked about future issues, Te Riele and Strietman observed that in the Netherlands the “disturbingthought” and realization has occurred that life-cycle analysis is not enough for a strategic way of thinking.Life-cycle analysis has long been perceived as the tool that would give definite answers to what products aregood or bad for the environment. However, LCA has been geared towards looking at the environmental loadper functional unit. Now, in the Netherlands, the thinking is moving towards looking at the value of a productinstead of the function of a product, and here LCA falls short. Te Riele suggested that value and load have tobe separated better. Stevels pointed out that there is a difference between scientific green, governmentalgreen, and perceived green.


Te Riele sees three major areas as gaining importance:

• Redesign of system concept—i.e., the sale of services rather than products (see also Product ServiceSystems, Ecological and Economic Basics)

• Influencing of system behavior—i.e., “get out of the box”

• Changing of accounting basics—i.e., to better reflect environmental impact (see change in Dutch taxsystem)

The Dutch government has connected the economic and environmental aspects (see collaboration betweenMinistries of Environment and Economic Affairs) and is now working on bringing in the social aspects.Currently, the fourth national policy act (“NMP4”) is being worked on by the government.

It is noteworthy that a distinction is made between population growth and household growth. Although thepopulation in the Netherlands is still growing (current population is 15 million), the number of householdsgrows faster. This causes even more strain on housing and land. It was stated that the environmental load iscaused evenly by three groups: industry, mobility, and household. The mobility sector includes industrialtraffic, so roughly 50% of the environmental load comes from industry and the other half from the privatesector. When asked about tele-commuting, Strietman mentioned that the Ministry of Traffic had done a studyand one of the findings was that people who tele-commuted traveled more that those who worked in officesbecause they still liked to get out of the house and even more on holidays in weekends.

Stevels suggest that there is still a lot of work to be done on the “classical” environmental issues: energy andtoxic substances. Also, supplier system needs work. Emphasizing the new tax system, it was stated that thetax should be on consumption, not on income.

REFERENCES

Beckers, Ester, and Spaargaren. 1999. Verklaringen van duurzame consumptie - Een speurtoch naar nieuweaanknopingspunten voor milieubeleid (Explanations of sustainable consumption - A search for new leads forenvironmental policy). Report for Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and Environment (publication seriesEnvironmental Strategy 1999/10), in Dutch. July.

Goedkoop, Van Halen, Te Riele, and Rommens. 1999a. Product Oriented Environmental Management - Its Theory andPractice. Report for Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning, and Environment. March.

Goedkoop, Van Halen, Te Riele, and Rommens. 1999b. Product Service Systems, Ecological and Economic Basics.Report for Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning, and Environment. March.

Mayer and Dijkema. 1999. “Naar een infrastructuur voor de uitwisseling van productgerelateerde milieugegevens”(Towards an infrastructure for the exchange of product related environmental data). School of Systems Engineering,Policy Analysis and Management, Technical University of Delft, in Dutch. October.

Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and Environment. 1998. Silent Revolution—Dutch Industry and DutchGovernment are working together for a better environment (the first experiences with implementing the DutchNational Policy Plan: A report on the efforts made by industry and the public authorities concerned). October.

Te Riele, Duifhuizen, Hötte, Zijlstra, and Sengers. 2000. Transities: Kunnen drie mensen de wereld doenomslaan?”(Transitions: Can three people turn the world around). Report for Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planningand Environment, in Dutch. January 28.

Vlek, Rooijers, and Steg. 1999. Duurzaam Consumeren - Meer kwaliteit van leven met minder materiaal? Ontwikkelingvan een model voor onderzoek en beleid (Sustainable Consumption - More quality of life with less material?Development of a model for research and policy). Report for Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning andEnvironment (publication series Environmental Strategy 1999/9), in Dutch. July.


Site: The European Commission Directorate for Science, Research and DevelopmentThe Environment Directorate-General200 rue de la Loi/Wetstraat 200B-1049 BrusselsBelgium

Date: April 3, 2000

WTEC Attendees: D. Allen (report author), D. Bauer, D. Durham, T. Gutowski, K. Rajurkar, E. Wolff

EC Attendees: H. PeroM. DoukaG. KatalagarianakisS. Cervera-MarchM. Gislev

INTRODUCTION

Two distinct groups were represented at the meeting. Attendees from the European Commission Directoratefor Science, Research and Development, who described their research portfolios, and a representative fromthe Environment Directorate-General, who described the European Union’s Integrated Pollution Preventionand Control Directive.

DIRECTORATE FOR SCIENCE, RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY

Herve Pero, Head of the EC Research and Technology Development (RTD) Programme on “Competitive andSustainable Growth,” gave an overview of the RTD program (described in detail atwww.cordis.lu/growth/src/cwp_en). The program has four pillars:

• Quality of life and living resources (with an annual budget of 2.4 billion Euro)

• Creating a user friendly information society (3.6 billion Euro)

• Promoting competitive and sustainable growth (2.7 billion Euro)

• Energy, environment, and sustainable development (1.1 billion Euro)

As is evident from their titles, most of the pillars incorporate environmental issues to some degree, but themain focus of activities in environmentally benign manufacturing is the Thematic Programme onCompetitive and Sustainable Growth. The thematic program has a set of key actions that concentrateresearch and technology development on clearly defined social and economic challenges. The four keyactions are:

• Efficient production, including design, manufacturing and control

• Intelligent production

• Eco-efficient processes and design

• Organisation of production and work

The projects address these key areas and fall into the categories of:

• Products of the future

• Advanced functional materials

• New generation of machines

• The extended enterprise

• The modern factory


Infrastructures

It was beyond the scope of the meeting to discuss individual projects. However, there was substantialdiscussion of mechanisms for setting strategic directions for research. The EC Directorate uses a number oftools to set strategic direction. To provide an overview of research needs, the Directorate funds “virtualresearch institutes” that suggest strategic directions for research. These are complemented by a number ofindustrial/academic networks that provide more technical insight and direction on research needs.Approximately 100 of these networks exist; many are Web based; many of the Web sites are cited at theDirectorate home page. Finally, most research is funded in the form of consortia, which generally containindustrial partners who help fund the research (approximately 50% in a typical consortium) and set researchdirection.

A typical consortium is funded at the level of approximately 1 million Euro per year for a period of three tofour years. Consortia are evaluated based on five criteria:

• Science and technology excellence

• Community added value

• Social needs

• Economic development

• Partnership and management

The focus is on matching the scientific base within the university systems with industry needs, particularlythose that will contribute to product quality, employment, or social needs.

After Herve Pero’s presentation, individual program managers described programs.

Maria Douka described a cluster of approximately 35 consortia in new processing technologies,environmentally benign materials and chemistries (new solvents, new catalysts, membrane separations,processing under supercritical materials), and process integration tools.

George Katalagarianakis described a program on new generation machines, which are described at www.tra-fect.com and www.euspen.com. The program focuses on issues such as efficient equipment design andmanufacture, rehabilitation and decommissioning.

Dr. Salvador Cervera-March described advanced materials and transformation technologies, includingsustainable technology, steel and other programs.

Finally, there was some discussion of programs jointly funded by the European Commission and the NationalScience Foundation. An initial, joint program in materials is in the advanced planning stages.

ENVIRONMENT DIRECTORATE-GENERAL

Magnus Gislev represented Herbert Aichinger, from the European Commission Environment Directorate.Mr. Gislev’s specific responsibility is the Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC) Directive. Thisdirective establishes best available techniques for environmental management in manufacturing processes(see http://europe.eu.int/comm/environment/ippc/index.htm).

The IPPC Directive is of use in assessing the state of environmentally benign manufacturing because itprovides information on both current and emerging technologies. (These prospective technologies, as well asthe reference documents, are described at the site http://eippcb.jrc.es.)

In addition to describing the IPPC, Mr. Gislev addressed a wide range of questions both in the groupdiscussion and in smaller, ad-hoc discussions. Of particular interest to the panel were a variety of productinitiatives underway at the Environment Directorate-General. Product take-back legislation is seen as animportant driver for environmental innovation in the automotive and electronics sector. Mr. Gislev reportedthat in the automotive sector, original manufacturers of new cars will be responsible for taking back and


recycling vehicles. Cars manufactured in 2001 need to meet a fixed recycling rate and this rate will begradually increased over time. In parallel, fuel economy increases will be required. Similar initiatives areplanned for the electronics sector.


Site: EX-CELL-O GmbHSalacher Straße 93D – 73054 Eislingen/FilsGermany

Date: April 4, 2000

WTEC Attendees: D. Bauer (report author), D. Allen, T. Gutowski, K. Rajurkar, E. Wolff

Hosts: Dr.-Ing. Lothar Ophey, General ManagerDipl.-Ing. Bert Lubner, Sales Manager

BACKGROUND

EX-CELL-O is one of several sister companies under IWKA. Machine tool products include transfer lines,high speed machining centers, special machine tools, test and assembly stations. The main customers are theauto industry and its suppliers, who use the machines to make cylinder blocks, cylinder heads, crankshaftsand connecting rods, gear boxes, coupling housing, etc.

CURRENT TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT TRENDS/INDUSTRY GOALS

High Speed Machining

EX-CELL-O is producing machines which operate at high speeds (accel ~ 1.2 g and speed ~ 120 m/sec).There is also current research into higher speeds and accelerations, but this requires a design shift, as thebehavior of secondary components (cabling sheet metal covers, splash guards, doors, etc.) under suchdynamic conditions becomes important. Current research in linear drives also supports the development ofhigher speed machines.

Dry Machining

With the high (and increasing) cost of cutting fluid management (fluid management is about 17% ofmanufacturing costs), there is significant development work in dry and minimal quantity lubricant (MQL)processing. This is the main environmentally related research effort at EX-CELL-O. Aerosolformation/aerosol management is of secondary concern, mainly for U.S. customers such as Ford.

There are several factors that become more important for dry and MQL machining. First, thermalmanagement becomes key. Much of the process heat is transferred to the chips, and hot chips need to beisolated from work piece and machine surfaces. The EX-CELL-O approach is to isolate chips onto a chipconveyor running under the center of each machine. The elevated temperature in the work piece itself leadsto different process planning paradigms, such as instances where some finishing passes are completed beforesome bulk removal (usually milling) passes to minimize dimensional inaccuracies caused by work piecethermal deformation. Second, chip removal also becomes challenging in dry machining. Gravity is usedwhere possible. Finally, MQL requires that cutting fluid be brought to the cutting surface as efficiently aspossible. This generally means mixing air and fluid shortly before coming to the cutting edge.

Dry machining of cast iron is fairly common, but otherwise, there has not yet been wide-scale manufacturingline implementation. First in-plant tests have been made to evaluate the quality and reliability of drymachining on aluminum parts.

Transfer Line Systems

Customers are increasingly interested in purchasing integrated transfer line systems. EX-CELL-O is applyingmodular design principles to simplify design of such systems. First, each machine is made up of definedmodules, such as sub-bases, ball screw spindles, doors, etc. Second there is a standardization of physical and


informational interfaces, such as the machining table, chip conveyor, control algorithms, etc. Third, there isthe definition of design rules, such as the consistent placement of secondary systems such as hydraulics, nohinged doors, and decentralised controls. Standardization between machine tool manufacturers is difficultbecause it conflicts with the need to differentiate from competitors.

With general trends towards take-back laws, and trends in production philosophy towards agility andreconfigurability, EX-CELL-O is beginning to think about strategies for reconfiguring machines for reuse.

Additional Technologies

There are several other research areas. First hard machining is being developed to replace grinding. There issome work on parallel kinematics (hexipod). There is some research on linear drives to enable increasedmachining speeds. Finally there is some research in laser machining. A more long range research effort withenvironmental implications is taking a systems approach to reducing the quantity and intensity of processsteps (melting→forming→cutting).


Site: Fraunhofer IGB (Institut Grenzflächen- und Bioverfahrenstechnik)Nobelstrasse 12D-70569 StuttgartGermany

Date: Apri 6, 2000

WTEC Attendees: T. Gutowski (report author), B. Bras, D. Durham, R. Horning, C. Murphy, T. Piwonka

Hosts: Prof. Dr. Herwig BrunnerDr. Christian OehrDr. Norbert StrohDr. Iris TrickProf. Dr. Hans KnackmussDr. Dieter Bryniok

INTRODUCTION

Professor Dr. Herwig Brunner provided us with an introduction and overview of the activities of theFraunhofer IGB. This institute employs 161 people with an annual budget of 17.7 million DM in 1999.Research is focused in three different areas: (1) Membrane and Interfacial Engineering, (2) Biotechnologyand Cell Engineering, and (3) Environmental Biotechnology. After a brief introduction by Dr. Brunner, wethen explained the mission and purpose of the WTEC panel. This was followed by five presentations by ourhosts, summarized below.

R&D ACTIVITIES

Interfacial Engineering and Plasma Technology for Clean Production (Dr. Christian Oehr)

Dr. Oehr described the importance of interfacial engineering for the recycling of plastics. An emphasis onplastics recycling and reuse leads designers to use fewer materials, which in turn creates a need to altersurface properties for different applications. Surface treatment can affect a variety of important propertiesincluding appearance and wettability as well as adhesion to other materials or coatings. The IGB is equippedto modify surfaces with various plasma surface treatments, including plasma cleaning, etching, sterilization,surface modification and plasma polymerization. For evaluation of surface treatment procedures a widevariety of techniques for surface characterization are available. Applications to textiles and biomaterialswere mentioned. Dr. Oehr also mentioned that they have used a surface tension measurement apparatus tomonitor the environmental quality of water.

Membrane Technology and Environmentally Benign Production (Dr. Norbert Stroh)

IGB produces a variety of membranes including both polymers and ceramics in a array of geometries. Oneinteresting project described by Norbert Stroh was online measurement of cutting fluid and liquids. Cuttingfluids are routinely used in machining to cool and lubricate and generally improve the material removalprocess. Under the conventional situation, cutting fluids are monitored infrequently by laboratorytechniques. As a consequence most adjustments to the composition are based on experience rather than data.Hence, renewal tends to be conservative and very likely wasteful of cutting fluids. The purpose of thisproject was to develop an online cutting fluid quality monitoring system to be used in a feedback control loopfor fluid renewal. In this scheme, six parameters were measured directly or inferred from othermeasurements: temperature, concentration of the tramp oil, pH, conductivity, and concentration of theaerobic micro-organisms. The concentration of micro-organisms is actually measured indirectly bymeasuring the concentration of O2. This new technology makes possible reduction in the amount of cuttingfluids and additives used and can significantly extend the life of cutting fluid. These developments areparticularly important because in Germany cutting fluids are treated as toxic waste and require special


handling procedures. Furthermore, this will have a positive impact on worker health by reducing micro-organisms, which are harmful to people.

Sustainable Biotechnology (Dr. Iris Trick)

In this area Dr. Trick provided reviews on two important project areas: (1) a new approach using integratedbioprocesses for the production of lactic acid and other products from whey, and (2) waste treatment forsolids including the precipitation of metals.

The integrated bioprocess for the recovery of products from whey has the potential for a significant positiveenvironmental effect because it not only captures useful products from whey, but it also helps solve asignificant waste fluid problem. Waste fluids from milk products manufacturing constitute an increasinglyexpensive disposal problem due to the high chemical oxygen demand (COD) and high amounts of wheyproduced. The proposed process reduces the COD of wastewater by 93%.

In the second area, Dr. Trick described a variety of projects for the treatment of various solid wastes. Theseincluded: (1) the anaerobic treatment of organic waste, (2) the anaerobic treatment of sewage sludge, and (3)an integrated purification process for municipal sewage, which included modern membrane techniques,anaerobic and aerobic processes.

From Benign Production to Benign Products (Prof. Dr. Hans Knackmuss)

Here we learned about the synthesis of new natural polymers with amine and ester bonds to promotebiodegradability. Dr. Knackmuss mentioned to us that they had tried to apply genetic engineeredmicroorganisms for biodegradation of xenobiotics in complex systems without success. He showed us theproduction of a new degradable type of cellulose called Ecoflex. Because of the designed weaker bonds,these new compounds are biodegradable. This new material has good properties, but there is a small costpremium to produce it now. Furthermore, some new developments in process technology will also beneeded. Hence, some appropriate economic driver would be quite helpful for the development of these newtypes of materials.

Fraunhofer Office for Energy and Environment (Dr. Dieter Bryniok)

Dr. Bryniok talked about the planned establishment of the Fraunhofer Center for Energy and Environment tobe opened at the University of Pittsburgh in the USA to promote technology transfer. The center will focuson chemical technology, membrane technology, biotechnology, combustion technology and safetyengineering for energy and environmental technology. A preliminary office for the preparation of the centerhas been working since August 1999. This new Fraunhofer adds to a list of others in the United States,including one at Boston University in Massachusetts. Apparently, these Fraunhofers answer a need in theUnited States that is not met by the current university research system.


Site: Fraunhofer IPT (Institut Produktionstechnologie)Steinbachstrasse 17D-52074 AachenGermany

Date: April 7, 2000

WTEC Visitors: J. Sutherland (report author), D. Allen, D. Bauer, K. Rajurkar, E. Wolff

Hosts: Michael Leiters, Chief Engineer, Planning and Organization DepartmentFrank DopperDirk Untiedt

INTRODUCTION

Fraunhofer IPT is affiliated with the University of Technology-Aachen (Rheinisch-Westfalische TechnischeHochschule Aachen) and is largely focused on machining processes and machine tools. The head of theinstitute is Prof. F. Klocke. For 1999, Fraunhofer IPT had a workforce of approximately 900 people (250academic staff, 200 non-academic staff, and 450 students). Financial support may be broken down intoinstitute funding ($12 million), research funding ($10 million), federation support ($8 million), and industryfunding ($7 million). The departments of the institute are: (i) Process Technology (led by Prof. Klocke), (ii)Production Machines (Prof. Weck), (iii) Metrology and Quality Management (Prof. Pfeifer), (iv) Planningand Organization (Prof. Eversheim), and (v) Center for Manufacturing Innovation-Boston (Prof. Sharon).These departments are working together on issues related to environmental engineering and management.

R&D ACTIVITIES

Efforts at IPT related to environmental oriented production can be broken down into five areas:

• Planning and introduction of environmental management systems

• Computer aided life-cycle analysis (CALA)

• Resource-oriented production optimization

• Measurement and reduction of particle emissions during materials processing

• Realization of model scale systems and plants

CALA (computer aided life-cycle analysis) is a software program that has been developed at the institute forthe process-oriented analysis and evaluation of products and enterprises. The purpose of the software is tolower the energy and material demand over the whole product life cycle and to identify improvementopportunities in terms of resource consumption or waste reduction. Software functions include the capturingof data (i.e., the storage of process-specific energy, material, and waste data), balancing (internal aggregationof data), economical and ecological evaluation, and utilization (results presentation). The software considersa given reference product (quantity, unit, etc.) and then the input resources and outputs to the ecosystem aredefined for each subsystem (process). CALA provides information on both the econosphere and theecosphere. The effect of changes in subsystem ordering may be evaluated in terms of such measures asresource depletion, global warming, and toxic emissions. A variety of graphical displays are possible withCALA and both absolute and relative comparisons may be made. When CALA has been applied to specificprojects, both top-down and bottom-up analyses have been undertaken.

One effort was discussed in which picture tube and glass manufacturing is being analyzed by Philips incooperation with the institute. A number of initiatives are underway, including an environmental comparisonof glass bath lines, exploration of rinse water circulation methods, evaluation of alternatives for rinse watercirculation, and glass sorting/recycling. One of the key lessons learned is the importance of inter-companycooperation—matching up of one organization’s “wastes” to another’s material demands.


In 1998 Fraunhofer IPT completed a survey of 1000 companies regarding sustainable production issues.Companies identified the following topics as being important in the future: (a) low emission processes(45%), (b) environmentally friendly auxiliary materials (58%), (c) environmentally friendly raw materials(41%), (d) resource efficient technologies (54%), (e) internal recycling (26%), and (f) external recycling(26%). A similar survey of consultants produced the following: (a) low emission processes (26%), (b)environmentally friendly auxiliary materials (8%), (c) environmentally friendly raw materials (10%), (d)resource efficient technologies (23%), (e) internal recycling (15%), and (f) external recycling (10%).

An activity is also underway to characterize the airborne emissions associated with machining processes and,in particular, operations performed without cutting fluid. Experiments are being performed for a range of toolmaterials, tool geometries, cutting conditions, enclosure systems, and exhaust/filtering systems. Informationon particulate concentrations and particle size distributions are being collected in the experiments. Workmaterials of interest include brittle materials and fiber reinforced plastics. Some concern exists about theeffect of brittle dust particles on the wear of the machine tool in the absence of a cutting fluid.


Site: Fraunhofer IZM (Institut Zuverlassigkeit und Mikrointegration)Gustave-Meyer-Allee 25Gebaude 17D-13355 BerlinGermany

Date: April 6, 2000

WTEC Visitors: J. Sutherland (report author), D. Allen, D. Bauer, K. Rajurkar, E. Wolff

Hosts: Dr. Lars HeinzeDr. Jutta Muller

INTRODUCTION

The Fraunhofer IZM researches, develops, and verifies methods and technologies for mounting andconnecting microelectronic components and systems (electronic packaging). The institute has the followingdepartments: (i) Chip Interconnection Technologies, (ii) Mechanical Reliability and Micro Materials, (iii)High Density Interconnect and Waferlevel Packaging, (iv) Advanced System Engineering, (v) BoardInterconnection Technologies, (vi) Polymeric Materials and Composites, (vii) Micro Devices and Equipment,and (viii) Environmental Engineering. The IZM is affiliated with the Technical University of Berlin (theResearch Center for Microperipheric Technologies). The director of both institutes is Dr. Reichl. For 1998Fraunhofer IZM had a workforce of approximately 250 employees (150 staff and 100 students). The financialexpenditures of IZM for 1998 were approximately $30 million.

Dr. Heinze gave a brief overview of Fraunhofer IZM, which has a center of competence in packaging,quality, and reliability that maintains a 800 square meter clean room facility. The IZM has three main areasof activity: material development and simulation (micro devices, equipment, materials, and reliability);packaging technology (chip integration including flip chip, high density, and board interconnections); andsystem integration (pervasive computing systems, environmental engineering, and advanced systemsengineering). Most institute projects are focused on interconnection technology.

R&D ACTIVITIES

The main areas of emphasis for the environmental engineering department include: environmentallycompatible product design, material analysis for ecological assessment, environmental and economic analysisof processes, and material and product recycling. The department is working on the development of a ToxicPotential Indicator (TPI) based on product material composition. Factors such as water pollution, hazardoussubstances, and industrial hygiene (workplace concentrations) are being used to form the TPI. Software anddata are being established to support the effort, and a logarithmic aggregation approach is being used tocombine the environmental information for multi-component products. One of the motivations for thesoftware development is to provide a framework for managing environmental information for productsobtained through the supply chain.

One example of an environmental review of a semiconductor company with a product based on SMT(surface mount technology) revealed the following impacts (expressed as a percentage of the total Eco-Indicator points):

• Wafer Processing 40%

• Chip Assembly and packaging 40%

• Transport to final tests 11%

• Business Travel 6%

• Others 3%


Some discussion followed relating to the need to compile environmental data (MSDS sheets, TPIevaluations, etc.) from suppliers and maintain the database.

In another project a CMOS process in semiconductor manufacturing was analyzed for its environmentalimpact. Most of the impact was attributed to energy usage, with 50% of the total energy associated withconditioning the clean room air. Strategies for reducing water usage in processing are being investigated. Avariety of alternatives to lead-based solders are being investigated in terms of their technological andenvironmental impacts. Work is underway to eliminate the use of cyanide in plating operations.

The use of Eco-Toolbox (software) as part of the integrated, computer-aided design of electronic packageswas then described. The software relies on a database of environmental characteristics for each component.The thinking is that environmental and economic information can be combined and provided to the designeras a “cost of ownership.” There is growing interest in the use of Eco-Toolbox, and designers are beginningto adopt its use as more attention is being paid to the environment.

Activities related to the remanufacturing of electronic products include: the automatic disassembly of PCBs,optical scanning of the board to identify valuable components, and desoldering the components via controlledheating that does not damage components. The establishment of a network structure for electronic productswas also noted (consisting of producers, scrap merchants, recyclers, disposal specialists, and second-handdealers).

The visitors asked Drs. Heinze and Muller about their involvement in education-related activities. Thedepartment has offered lectures and practical training to engineering students on the subject (design ofenvironmentally friendly products) for three years. It was indicated that the student interest level is small butgrowing quickly.

Discussion concluded with the identification of high priority issues for the future:

• Lead-free, halogen-free PCBs

• Energy issues in microfabrication

• Life-cycle inventories and information management in the supply chain

• Quality management for reuse and repair, including remaining lifetime assessment

• Environmental impact of mobile products


Site: Hoogovens SteelP.O. Box 10.0001970 CA IJmuidenThe Netherlands

Date: April 4, 2000

WTEC Attendees: T. Piwonka (report author), D. Durham, R. Horning

Hosts: Willem KatDr. Raads Welvaadt

INTRODUCTION

Hoogovens is a major producer of steel and aluminum, located in the Netherlands. Its steel plant at IJmuidenoccupies 800 hectares on the North Sea, and is the only integrated steel plant in the Netherlands. Hoogovensmerged last year with British Steel Corp. to form the new company Corus, which is headquartered in GreatBritain. Hoogoven’s major products are used in the transportation, packaging, and construction industries.Forty-five people are employed in the environmental department at the IJmuiden site.

In the Netherlands the environmental system is one of covenants between industry and the government.Industry associations meet with the government and negotiate four-year goals for the introduction ofenvironmentally beneficial manufacturing technology. A year-by-year plan is established for the constructionand installation of the new technology. When the goals are reached, the new technology becomes part of theoperating permit for the plant. If the goal is not reached, meetings are held, and the reasons why the goalcould not be reached are discussed. New goals are established with new time-tables. An advantage of thissystem is that companies can plan their capital investments in the environmental area four years at a time.Goals are set within the larger framework of national and EU goals.

Hoogovens is a “two metal” company, producing both steel and aluminum. They are dependent on theircustomers’ specifications. As an example, they pointed out that Volkswagen is a major customer, and thatVolkswagen is facing take-back laws. Therefore their alloy development is focused on developing alloys thatcan perform well and still be easy to recycle.

It was pointed out that at the current time the national goals for NOx emissions do not appear to be reachable,even though Hoogovens has installed a state-of-the-art deNOx plant in IJmuiden. NOx is apparently a greaterproblem to the Dutch government than to other governments in Europe.

Hoogovens publishes an annual environmental report. Dutch law requires that all companies report theirdischarges; this report is on file as a matter of public record. (The Dutch do not, however, publish an annuallist of the top ten polluters in the country as do the British.)

EBM ACTIVITIES

The company recycles and reuses all but about 1% of the residual substances (other than shipped steel) in theplant. Blast furnace slag is used in the construction industry, tar from the coke ovens is used in the chemicalindustry, ammonium sulfate and sulfuric acid are used to make fertilizer. Even the excess blast furnace andcoke oven gas that is not used on-site is piped to a nearby electrical generation plant. Solid waste disposal isnot permitted in Holland. One of the problems they have had is Zn-containing blast furnace dust. They havefound a way to use it in cupolas in foundries producing low-strength cast iron. They also have a problem withradioactive elements in their blast furnace dust; the dust is stored on-site until the radioactivity decreases toan acceptable level.


A major key to their success in recycling is the operation of a sintering plant (they noted that Sweden hadordered all sintering plants closed for fear of environmental damage). All solid wastes from the plant arecombined with iron ore and sintered to make a feed for the blast furnaces. This allows them to concentratetheir air and water treatment efforts on the effluent from the sintering plant, and substantially decreasesenvironmental waste. The flue gas cleaning system has a two-stage scrubber that removes SO2, HCl, and HF,as well as much of the dust that contains heavy metals and dioxins.

They are concerned with global warming, but concede that at this time there is no practical substitute forcarbon in reducing iron ore. They have considered burning plastic as a source of carbon and hydrogen, but anLCA showed that hydrogen contributed very little to the reduction of carbon dioxide. They are capable ofperforming LCAs, and use them in their long-range planning. They will provide their customers with data foruse in LCAs that involve their products, but in general are not enthusiastic about them, as steel often suffersin comparison to other materials when an LCA is invoked.

They are concerned with recycling pressures. Coated steels are a particular worry, and they are working withtheir automotive customers to solve the problems. In Holland, household waste is not separated at home. Thiscauses losses in beverage cans, 98% of which are made of steel.

They are now focusing on meeting European environmental rules in their operations. BAT (“best availabletechnology”) will be the standard across Europe. Because they have developed a de-NOx process theybelieve they will have a competitive advantage (apparently their competitors were not thrilled whenHoogovens managed to establish this technology to mitigate the NOx problem). By the end of 2000 allHoogovens plants were expected to be ISO 14000 compliant. This is as much to satisfy their workers as tosatisfy their customers (they have had a similar internal system for 14 years).

They noted that odor control is a problem in some of their operations, and that they had concerns overprojected PM2.5 regulations.

In determining how to assess environmental investments, they go through a three-step process:

• How big is the problem?

• What will it cost to fix it?

• Will the proposed fix really work?

As an example, they cited a new direct reduction process that was not installed, even though it had clearenvironmental advantages, because their current steelmaking process was far less costly.

The environmental advantages of the merger between British Steel and Hoogovens are still being workedout. It was not clear what priorities, British or Dutch, would be used in setting the company’s environmentalagenda for the next few years. However, the Hoogovens people were looking forward to acquiring BritishSteel technology, such as the use of expert systems to control metallurgical processes.


Site: Institute for Communication and Analysis of Science and Technology (ICAST)28, rue de l’Athenee1205 GeneveSwitzerland

Date Visited: April 5, 2000

WTEC Attendees: D. Allen (report author), D. Bauer, K. Rajurkar, J. Sutherland

Hosts: Suren Erkman, Director, ICASTClaude Gentaz, Director, Transtec S.A.

INTRODUCTION

The Institute for Communication and Analysis of Science and Technology (ICAST) is a non-profit researchinstitution specializing in analyzing and communicating scientific and technical issues with significant publicpolicy implications. The director of ICAST, Suren Erkman, is recognized internationally for his work inindustrial ecology, an emerging discipline that examines the flows of materials and energy in anthropogenicsystems. Studies in industrial ecology are useful in examining a number of strategies for environmentallybenign manufacturing, including the use of eco-industrial parks, and byproduct synergy (using wastes fromone process as raw materials for another). Attending the meeting from ICAST were Suren Erkman, andClaude Gentaz, an associate of Mr. Erkman, specializing in flows of metals.

R&D ACTIVITIES

The ICAST group described a number of projects that they are conducting or planning. Dr. Gentaz describedan initiative that will link zinc battery recycling, zinc refining, and steel making in an industrial ecosystem.Dr. Gentaz described the technological, social, and political hurdles that need to be overcome in establishingsuch networks. He also described the factors that can inhibit the implementation of profitable industrialnetworks (these included reluctance to rely on additional industrial partners and unwillingness to exploreprojects outside of core competency areas).

Suren Erkman described some of his experiences in developing industrial networks in India and China. Hestressed the strong interest of India and China in this area, but pointed out that the models of industrial parksthat are effective in western Europe (e.g., Kalundborg) may be ineffective in developing countries because ofdifferences in the sizes of enterprises and differences in the transportation infrastucture. He also pointed outthat in these countries, the main focus is on developing industrial networks to enhance profitability, ratherthan to meet environmental goals. Regardless of the motivation, these industrial networks promote theefficient use of resources and reduce the generation of wastes.

Suren Erkman also identified the need for data on material flows. Unfortunately, the extensive data setsdeveloped for life-cycle assessments are of limited use in the design of industrial networks. This is becausedata for industrial network design require information on the location of the material flows and LCA datasources are not, in general, spatially resolved. So, once again, data availability is a key issue in implementingthis component of environmentally benign manufacturing.

Finally, Suren Erkman briefly discussed two sets of policy drivers for his work. The first set of drivers isassociated with the liberalization of energy markets in Europe that is scheduled for July, 2000. While theuncertainty surrounding this liberalization is delaying some capital investments, it was also promotinginterest in innovative industrial networks. The second set of drivers dealt with the unique position ofSwitzerland in European markets. While not a member of the EU, Switzerland is home to many large firmswith extensive dealings throughout Europe. The complex policies created by Switzerland’s position caneither inhibit or promote novel solutions to environmental challenges.


Site: IVF– Institutet för Verkstadsteknisk Forskning(Swedish Institute of Production Engineering Research)Argongatan 30, SE-431 53 MölndalSweden

Date: April 5, 2000

WTEC attendees: B. Bras (report author), D. Durham, R. Horning, D. Thurston

Hosts: Mr. Richard Berglund, Division Manager, Industrial Environment Division.Presentations by Göran Brohammer, Hans-Lennart Norblom, Lars Österberg, PerLindahl, and Carl Gunnar Bergendahl

BACKGROUND

IVF is the biggest industrial institute in Sweden with 230 employees. It is comparable in mission to theGerman Fraunhofer and Dutch TNO institutes, although not as large. IVF’s focus is on manufacturing andelectronics industry. Its financing is as follows: 42% from companies, 31% from NUTEK, 9% from theSwedish Council for Work Life Research, 6% from IRECO R&D grants, and 12% from European Unionprojects (see also ref. IVF 1998). IVF does applied R&D (with industry partners), business development(information activities), and technical development and implementation (focused on products).

A noteworthy issue is that in Sweden, 90% of the companies have 50 or fewer employees. Recent mergershave caused some change in this number, but not significantly. Sweden also has very few global companies.

With respect to environmental issues, IVF staff believes that good, effective technological solutions lie at theunion of economy, quality, and environment. Some of IVF’s findings are that the direct contribution of themanufacturing industry to environmental problems is very low in terms of energy consumption, electricity,CO2, NOx, VOC, etc. The only exception is the direct impact related to metals. However, the product impact(i.e., the indirect impact) is very high, followed by the impact caused by suppliers. Environmental issues arestill not a driving force. However, the thinking is very much focused on life-cycle analyses and theconsequences of a change.

After the background presentation by Mr. Berglund, several presentations related to environmentally benignmanufacturing were given.

R&D ACTIVITIES

Joining Processes (Per Lindahl)

Mr. Lindahl provided an overview of some of the joining and forming work at IVF. IVF has 20 personsworking mostly on welding; a few work on adhesives. Seven persons work on laser welding, with someworking on associated simulation and robotics.

Mr. Lindahl explained IVF’s efforts in friction stir welding where a tool-bit is used to generate heat fromfriction that is used to weld. The efforts are focused on aluminum welding. Motivation comes from severalareas—e.g., Volvo would like to weld aluminum alloys. Friction stir welding is also deemed better forrecycling because no welding filler material is introduced. Hence, the material is purer. Lindahl cites anumber of friction stir welding successes. However, the primary project described was on the straightening oftruck chassis and motorcycle frames. IVF worked with a small company that used the change in color of soap(white to brown) as an indicator for the amount of heat brought into a truck frame for straightening.However, the soap changes color at 400°C whereas aluminum needs to remain below 250°C in order to retainits performance properties. Lindahl stated that thermocouples are now used instead of soap.


Lindahl also provided some information on adhesives and their environmental issues that basically deal withthe generally known problem of toxicity versus performance. Swedish regulations are much stricter thanU.S. regulations.

With respect to laser welding, Lindahl stated that although this is more precise than “regular” welding,efficiency is a problem. YAG laser welding equipment is big and has a 4% efficiency. Diode lasers are goingto be better, but are not yet at the required performance level. Lindahl is investigating the use of lasers forwelding aluminum.

All these joining technologies promote aluminum as a material of choice, in case weight is an important issue(e.g., in the transport industry). IVF thinks that aluminum is a good choice.

Surface Engineering (Lars Österberg)

In Sweden, there is little development of new processes. Many new processes come from abroad. In Sweden,there are many job-shops (fewer than 20 employees) that avoid new coating processes out of fear for the risk.IVF’s work mode in introducing new process technology is to

• seek cooperation with the process developer

• do a vertical project with suppliers, coaters, and end-users

• bring in new processes and scale up new technology

New areas for EBM processes are powder painting and chromium-6 (hexavalent) free surface treatment.

Powder painting is deemed to be a good process and has long been used for metal painting. Now, new usesfor powder painting are being explored:

• Wood. The problem is that wood is very heat sensitive. IVF’s goal is to set up a complete test-bed forwood powder painting.

• Aircraft components. Powder painting currently is not done for these components—again because of theheat brought in, as well as the conservative risk-averse nature of the industry.

• Plastic materials. Although the non-conductivity problem has been overcome, heat again can be anissue. The recyclability of coated plastics is also reduced.

With respect to chromium-6 free surface treatments, IVF has worked on replacing hard chromium coatingwith chromium-3 coatings, but Österberg stated that no known process with chromium-3 exists. CurrentlyIVF is working on chromate free coatings for the building industry and aircraft industry. It was stated thatalthough chromium coatings are perceived as environmentally harmful, they actually result in a longerproduct life and from a life-cycle perspective actually cause a lower environmental impact than, say,repetitive painting. An example of a kitchen water faucet was shown. Its life with chromium coating was 15+years, whereas its life with powder coating was only 9 years.

Electronic Production (Carl Gunnar Bergendahl)

The main focus of IVF’s work in electronics production is on product realization, specifically reliability,environmental compatibility, and high yield manufacturability. The environmental compatibility aspectbecame more important in the beginning of the 1990s. The Nordic countries produce about 500,000 tons ofelectronic and electrical scrap per year. IVF’s group focuses on how to reduce the environmental impactthroughout the product life cycle by design, in contrast to Germany where the focus is more on the take-backand recycling, according to Bergendahl.

Mentioned is the proposal for an EU directive for waste from electrical and electronic equipment (July 1999)which calls upon member states to reduce lead, mercury, cadmium, hexavalent chromium, PBB and PBDE.These substances are to be phased out by January 1, 2004. Components with halogenated flame retardantsalso are to be removed.


The TCO labeling of computers also had a big effect on manufacturers. The TCO requirements have beenadopted by over 100 manufacturers, worldwide. IVF is certified by TCO to handle applications and testing.

Bergendahl discussed some examples of IVF projects. One project dealt with CFC phase-out in cleaningoperations. Twenty Nordic companies participated in the study. The outcomes were as follows:

• CFC free cleaning was possible with equal or less cost

• 50% of the companies ended up not having to clean at all, the rest could use water and/or alcohol

• a 2-3 years headstart was gained in knowledge

• a complete phase-out of CFC for cleaning electronics was achieved in Sweden

A key issue was a shift from thinking about cleaning to thinking about cleanliness.

Another study cited was an international project (with 12 international companies) on flame retardants inelectronics. Swedish studies found evidence of bromium flame retardants in breast milk and in recyclingfacility workers. According to Bergendahl, in Europe, the drivers for reducing flame retardants areenvironment and health. In Japan, the drivers are dioxine problems during incineration and European marketrequirements. In the U.S., the drivers are purely business; there is no purely environmental concern at all,according to Bergendahl. Similar to the cleanliness vs. cleaning thinking, the IVF idea is to move away fromflame retardancy by thinking about fire safety and increasing fire safety by design. It was stated that U.S. firemarshals are interested in the labeling of products meeting fire safety requirements.

A third sample project mentioned was related to the use of anaesotropic adhesives for replacing lead solder.A cellular phone example was shown where this technology was used. This technology is commercially usedtoday. (For the latest information about electronics and the environment at IVF, see http://extra.ivf.se/dfee.)

Eco-design with SMEs (Hans-Lennart Norblom)

IVF has worked on introducing eco-design in small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs). This was aninternational project together with Norwegian and Finnish institutes. The technology and approach used wasobtained from Syntens in the Netherlands where a similar project was performed in the early nineties. Inessence, the IVF project attempts a technology transfer of the Syntens’ approach, tools, and findings.

The IVF project has a budget of SEK 2,500,000 (about $300,000). IVF is working with 14 companiesranging in size from 10 to 200 employees. The eco-design tools used for this project are the MET-matrix,environmental Failure Mode and Effect Analysis (FMEA), environmental Quality Function Deployment(QFD), Eco-Indicator 95 manual (now Eco-Indicator 99), EcoScan, SimaPro, and the Eco-strategy Wheel.

Almost all of these tools came from the Netherlands (developed by Delft University of Technology,PreConsultants) where they were used in the Dutch Syntens project.

A surprise finding for IVF was that many of the participating companies did not even use “regular” FMEAand QFD. Normally, one would expect familiarity with these approaches.

Conclusions of the project were that

• The above mentioned tools were good enough for the SMEs, although SimaPro was too difficult forSMEs.

• The SMEs do not put enough effort into eco-design. They are too busy and do not know whether it willpay off.

IVF believes that “environmental should be part of design, not part of environmentalist.” It was stated thatmany environmentalists consider the above tools to be incomplete, but the findings indicate that they arealready good enough for a designer to work with.


Life-Cycle Assessment (Göran Brohammer)

Mr. Brohammer provided details on the current state of life-cycle assessment (LCA). According to him, theuse of LCA in a company evolves according to a natural progression. First, the focus is on individual casestudies. This phase lasts for about 1-3 years. Second, one starts to aggregate data and build (company)databases. This phase also lasts for about 1-3 years. The third phase is that the gained skills are adopted forproduct and process design. This is a continuous process and is currently state-of-the-art thinking in LCA.Brohammer foresees that the fourth phase might be to adopt LCA within management systems, but this isstill an open issue.

A critical problem is that LCAs are done when the data are available, but this generally is too late in thedesign process to change the design. Moving the LCA earlier in the design process is therefore necessary. Itwas also emphasized that the ISO 14042/43 LCA standard does not allow a single index/metric (such as, e.g.,the Eco-Indicator 95) for product promotion. A single index is only allowed for internal evaluation purposes,not for external marketing.

Background on Type III eco-labeling (ISO Technical Report 14025) was also given. Sweden, Canada, Koreaand Japan are looking at Type III eco-labels. The Swedish system has existed since 1997. An internationaltrial with Ricoh has been underway since the end of 1999. For type III eco-labels, the ISO 14042/43 LCAstandard is augmented with Product Specific Requirements (PSR) which includes specifications for theproduct groups (e.g., copy machines) and specific rules for the LCA. The result is a statement of resourcesuse, emissions, and the translation to environmental effects (use of a single index is not allowed). This formsthe input to the Environmental Product Declaration (EPD). (Detailed information can be found atwww.environmarket.com/epd/.)

Brohammer considers LCA more as a learning and attention-directing tool. The main conclusion afterperforming an LCA is often that the product should be improved. This becomes a driver for gaining marketshare through better products. As an example, he cited Electrolux’s “green” refrigerator. This refrigeratorcosts a bit more for the consumer but consumes less energy than the “regular” refrigerator. Demand for thegreen refrigerator is very high and has boosted Electrolux’s market share.

Brohammer thinks that in the future there will be more screening type LCAs, whereas detailed studies will belimited to only certain key aspects.

REFERENCES

Institutet för Verkstadsteknisk Forskning (IVF). 1998. IVF Annual Report 1998. Institutet för Verkstadsteknisk Forskning- Swedish Institute of Production Engineering Research. Mölndal, Sweden.


Site: MIREC B.V.Dillenburgstraat 4Postbus 800155600 JZ EindhovenThe Netherlands

Date: April 4, 2000

WTEC Attendees: C. Murphy (report author), B. Bras, D. Thurston

Hosts: Paul Verhappen, Projecten & ProcessenJohan Zwart, International Account Manager

BACKGROUND

MIREC was established in response to a metal shortage after World War II as an internal department ofPhilips. In the early 1960s, a second plant was started to handle hazardous waste. A production outlet forproduct dismantling (overstocks and quality related returns) was established in the late 1970s. End-of-lifemanagement was begun in the late 1980s. MIREC became a separate organization in the early 1990s. Thelogistics and hazardous waste portion of the operation was sold to a sister company last year. MIREC wasowned briefly by a British company, Cleanaway, before they were sold to Watco N.V., a Belgian company.Watco N.V. is owned by Fabricom, which is owned by Tractebel (an energy company), which in turn isowned by Suez-Lyonnaise des Eaux, a French corporation that also owns SITA, another waste company,which just bought BFI Europe. In addition to the site in Eindhoven, MIREC has a separate plant in Hollandfor glass (lamps and CRTs), several plants in Belgium, and one in Germany that is a trade organization. Theyare currently buying an electronics recycling company in Germany. Their main focus is now electronics andsome industrial scrap metals.

LEGISLATION

The EU has ruled that each member country must have its own take-back legislation by 2001 or else mustadopt the general European version. It is expected that existing legislation, such as that present in theNetherlands, will provide the model for the EU. The Netherlands is the first country in Europe that hasadopted and fully implemented take-back legislation. More information on the Dutch laws can be found onthe Web site of the Dutch Ministry of Spatial Ordering and Environment (www.vrom.nl). Belgium also has alaw, but it is not currently being enforced. Germany is in the process of refining its legislation.

MIREC operations are mostly driven by legislation. The take-back legislation currently in effect in Hollandincludes medical equipment, and other items that might be very difficult to collect. In addition, it covershistorical not just current products. However, this applies only if the company is still in business and makingthat type of product. For example, a company that used to make computers, but now makes only software,will not be responsible for computer take-back. The take-back law covers two categories: ICT (informationcommunication technology products) and NVMP (Nederlandse Vereniging voor Metaal- en Electro-Producenten, or the Dutch Association for Metal and Electro-Producers), which include toys, tools, andrefrigerators.

ICT products, which include computer CPUs, monitors, telephones, and printers, are collected by contractors(including MIREC). As it is brought into the disposition center, each item is invoiced by the name of theproducer and its weight. MIREC measures the total weight received, and each producer pays a percentageshare based on the amount attributed to its company. This approach provides OEMs with an incentive toreduce both product mass and obsolescence rates. All Dutch OEMs are required to participate in thisprogram. Companies are exempted if they can demonstrate a collection system that is effective, but if theirproducts start showing up at general collection points, this will be seen as evidence that their system is notworking. While foreign companies are not required to participate, many, such as Dell, participate voluntarily.


Last year more than 50% of the incoming items appeared to be orphan products. This situation arises when(1) the company is no longer a producer, (2) a foreign company chooses not to participate, (3) a Dutchcompany is illegally not participating, or (4) brand of products is not recognized by the system as belongingto a participating producer. It is estimated that 25 to 30% of orphan products are due to non-compliance byDutch companies, who will consequently be fined. The difficulties in correlating brand names with producerwere credited as being the primary reason for the high volume of orphan products in 1999. This problem isbeing resolved by defining better links within the system to correctly identify producers by brand name.However, there still are and will continue to be a significant volume of orphan products. In order to cover thecost of handling these materials, each participating producer is proportionally responsible based on thepercentage of their identifiable contribution to the waste stream.

In contrast to the ICT system, NVMP products have a recycling “fee” that is paid at the point of purchase.This fee ranges from F2.5 for toys to F40 for refrigerators, and goes to an organization that manages thefund. Last year one million new TVs were sold in the Netherlands, but only 250,000 were recycled. This laghas allowed the managing organization to build up its fund and provide reserves for future periods ofdeclining sales. There is some concern that the fixed fee, point-of-purchase approach lends itself to pricefixing; consequently, the ICT system is being considered as an alternative. Both systems are intended notonly to fund recycling, but also to provide incentives to producers to design for recycling. In the NVMPproduct model, this would occur by allowing the fixed fee to be reduced. In the ICT model, the producerswould be charged a lower fee per unit of weight. However, the ICT approach is thought to have a tighterfeedback loop in addressing this issue.

LOGISTICS

In the Netherlands, the consumer has three choices. The first is to return the product directly to the producer.Some producers will come and pick up items, others will not accept returns at all. The second is to returnitems to a retail outlet or repair shop. The third is to take the product to one of 340 municipal collectionpoints. Municipalities and repair shops send the products to one of 60 regional collection stations (“ROS” =“Regionaal Overslag Station”). This number was selected in order to provide one ROS for every 300,000inhabitants. An additional goal was to place a ROS within 10-15 kilometers and/or a 20-minute drivingdistance of each municipal collection point. Municipalities receive a fee per kilogram and are responsible fortransporting material to the ROS. Transportation is done by road (25-ton trucks, max). Repair shops andstores may also take items to the ROS. ICT and NVMP collect from each ROS and send the collectedmaterials to one of five licensed recyclers. The distance between recyclers and the nearest ROS is 30 to 60minutes. Transportation costs are covered by ICT. NVMP uses the same logistics system. (In the 1990srefrigerators using CFCs were being sent to Africa and Asia. It is now illegal, per Dutch legislation, to exportCFC or products that are known as waste unless it can be proven that the receiving country is better equippedto handle the waste. This is based on technology, not volume and cost considerations.)

MIREC OPERATIONS

MIREC handles 90 to 95% of all returned ICT products in the Netherlands, which amounted to 3500 metrictons in 1999 (the first year the law was in effect) and which is projected to reach 8000 metric tons in 2000.The expected steady state is 10,000 to 12,000 metric tons/year. MIREC also handles 40% of all TV’s (anNVMP product). The other four licensed recyclers are: (1) CRS (Computer Recycling Service), whichhandles only very small volumes; (2) Coolrec, which handles 60% of TVs, all refrigerators, and 50% of smallappliances; (3) Recydur, which handles 50% of small appliances; and (4) HKS, a car shredder that works forCoolrec and which shreds washing machines and refrigerators. MIREC handles TVs as well as informationtechnology equipment. All of the glass and metals (75% by weight) are recycled; plastics and wood areincinerated. 30% of all CRT recycling is glass-to-glass; 70% is glass-to-ceramic.

Material vs. Product Recycling

The focus of MIREC operations is materials recycling. After any CRTs are removed, iron and aluminum areseparated out, resulting in a mixture of plastics, metals, and glass, which is then shredded and sent to a


smelter. MIREC operates by having direct contracts with producers buying commodities, rather than puttingmaterials on a commodity market. This is important to OEMs such as IBM who want to know where thematerial is going. MIREC will manage an amount for reuse and refurbishment, but only if requested by, andpaid for by, the particular customer. The ICT contract prohibits resale. MIREC is interested in developing asmall-scale re-manufacturing outfit, but will do so only if asked. Many OEMs are concerned that resale willcreate competition with new products. Many computer and peripheral companies are exploring leasingoptions, but question whether it is a good economic model because of rapid obsolescence. Copier OEMs,such as OCE, have made leasing pay by salvaging parts and upgrading only what is necessary.

Labor and Inventory

The MIREC site uses 100 regular employees and 40 contract employees as direct labor (two shifts a day, fivedays a week). Hiring also includes a program for at-risk youth. Turn-over is about one week using a FIFO(first in first out) system. Glass and metals are sent off immediately. Specialty materials are collected until aspecified amount is accumulated (e.g., aluminum is held until there is a total of 25 tons). The site has 20,000square meters of storage.

QUESTIONS

Displays

When asked about flat panel displays, our hosts explained that they avoid having to handle these ashazardous waste by not dismantling them. The unit is recycled whole. If it were necessary to dismantlelaptops, it would be very expensive to do so. We also asked about alternative markets for CRT glass (otherthan glass-to-glass and glass-to-ceramic) and were told that because of the Ba, Sr, and Pb content, the glasswas of very high quality and therefore not suitable for secondary recycling.

DFD and “Green” TVs

IBM, Lucent, Ericsson, Philips and many others are all working on “green” products despite the generalbelief that it will be too expensive. There are also efforts in the area of design for disassembly (DFD) andrecycling, but specifications are a challenge. Currently, because all products of a given type are lumpedtogether, it is difficult to create a price structure that would benefit a company for doing design for recycling.However, by 2005 when there are producer oriented streams, it may be possible to do this.

Other

The glass from scanners is glued in place so these must go to mixed waste, which is incinerated. Plasticsrecycling has been successful only when developed for a particular customer with a particular content andvolume (pull rather than push system). Low oil prices in recent years and mislabeling of plastics have alsohurt recycling efforts in this area. Although flame retardants are a concern, most plastics in Europe areincinerated.

TOUR

In addition to MIREC’s contract with ICT, it also contracts with individual companies. IBM is an individualclient. MIREC receives one trailer per day of IBM products. IBM pays extra for this service. All IBMmaterial is run in batches separate from other incoming product. When material arrives at MIREC, it hasalready been at another (IBM) site for component salvage. Hazardous waste is handled by a sister company.IBM keeps detailed track of its product EOL by waste stream. Hard disks are treated by physically damagingthem with a hammer.

The ICT material received by MIREC includes equipment plus wires, toner cartridges, and packagingmaterial. Each individual product is weighed and accounted for by manufacturer and product type. MIREC’scontract with ICT requires that they receive complete products in order to prevent scavenging of high value


components upstream. If an incomplete product is received, it is accepted but noted in the computer trackingsystem. The computerized tracking system accounts for five product types: CPUs, monitors, keyboards,telephones, and printers.

In the CRT dismantling operation, sorting is done by hand. There are 12 working stations on the secondfloor. As materials are sorted they are dropped into bins on the first floor. There are three material streams:wood and plastic, glass, and electronics. At the time of our visit there were nine men disassembling monitors.The operations model assumes a dismantling rate of 25 per hour. One reason for performing this step is toremove glass from the rest of the material stream, as glass in the shredder quickly dulls the blades. From thedisassembly line, materials are sent to the machine line. At the time of our visit, the line was being rebuilt inorder to improve the capacity.

Prior to shredding, toner and paper must be removed in order to reduce fire hazards. In the machine line, Al,steel, and plastics are separated. Plastics are separated using forced air. The line includes ferro-magnetic beltsand two in-line eddy current separators to remove non-ferrous metals. The dry separation techniques used arepretty standard for Holland. There is no waste water, but there is a bag-house dust evacuation system. Threeto four people are required to operate the line. The staging area is roughly equal to the area taken up byequipment. Metal assays are done in a lab on-site prior to being sent off to a smelter. ICP is used to performthe assays. MIREC believes its analysis is superior to others because the solution includes the matrix (allmetals not just precious metals). This method is more difficult because of the resulting spectral interference,but it gives more accurate results.

The perimeter of the operation is surrounded by an earthen wall. This provides a sound barrier to the close-byresidential areas. MIREC operates 12.5 hours per day using two shifts.

ISSUES AND CONCERNS

Plastics recycling is an economic challenge. Prices are hurt not only by depressed oil prices but also byoverproduction of plastic pellets and rapid changes in formulations and technology. These materials, whileobsolete for their intended uses, can be used for lower end applications. Sorting at end-of-life is also asignificant problem. Current legislation calls for labeling on plastic pieces greater than 50 grams. However,the recommendation was made that a good area for research would be internal marking systems (a plastic“DNA structure”) that would facilitate development of automatic detection systems.


Site: Siemens AGCorporate TechnologyZT D2PD-81730 MunichGermanyURL: http://www.siemens.com

Date: April 7, 2000

WTEC Attendees: C. Murphy (report author), B. Bras, T. Gutowski, D. Thurston

Hosts: Gerd Kohler, Project Manager, ManufacturingBernhard Brabetz, Project Manager, Design to PrototypeMartin Schaefer, Project Engineer, Materials Application CenterFerdinand Quella, Product Related Environmental Protection

BACKGROUND

Siemens is a 150-year old company with more than 400,000 employees worldwide. It is the third largestelectronics producer after GE and IBM (Hitachi is fourth). If, as planned, Siemens buys ATECS, anautomotive supplier, it is likely to become the second largest. More than half of Siemens’s sales are withinGermany and Europe, approximately one-fourth are to North America, and less than one-tenth are to Japan.The company is divided into six business units: Energy, Industry, Information and Communications,Transportation, Health Care, and Lighting. The Components Group was spun off in 1999 and is now knownas Infineon (see http://www.infineon.com). Our host was the Corporate Technology Group under whichenvironmental development falls and which also includes Materials and Manufacturing with electronicpackaging as its major focus. There are 19 people working in the environmental group, including MartinSchaefer who flew in from Berlin to meet with us. A subsection of Corporate Technology, called “CorporateFunctions,” handles worldwide coordination of certain environmental issues, including radiation and fireprotection. Dr. Quella heads one function: product-related environmental protection. In addition, groupsand factories have their own organizations which cooperate within a so-called “three-level tier” withcorporate environmental efforts.

According to their 1998 environmental report, Siemens has the philosophy that, “If we let coherentecological analysis inform the way we think and act, this almost inevitably produces economic benefit.” Inbrief, their five environmental objectives are:

• Establish environmental management systems in all plants

• Set up an internal reporting system

• Intensify environmentally compatible product design and extend the integrated approach toenvironmental protection to every area

• Favor suppliers who have an environmental management system

• Optimize transportation and logistics for worldwide distribution of goods

Rather than have a large environmental department, Siemens integrates product-related environmentalprotection into their design activities and into other organizational levels, including having someone on theboard (three-level model).

CURRENT ACTIVITIES

Materials and Manufacturing

This group is divided into nine subgroups:


• Ceramic Components and Reliability

• Plastics and Functional Materials

• Magneto- and Polymer-Electronics

• Micromechanics and Coating Technologies

• Packaging and Assembly

• Joining Technologies and Laser Processing

• Application Center Materials

• Analytics

• Design to Prototype (D2P)

The major focus of the Materials and Manufacturing Group is electronic packaging, or more generally, thebridge between silicon and the system. Mainstream interests include thin film technology, direct chip attach(DCA), and high density interconnect (HDI) substrates. For DCA, Siemens is looking at bumping, flip chip(conductive adhesives and compressed bumps with underfill), and high pin count mounting.

Lead-free and Halogen-free Products

One of the current concerns is elimination of lead (Pb) and halogens (Br) in printed wiring boards (PWBs).This is being driven largely by the WEEE directive, which at the time of our visit was slated to take effect in2004 (now extended to 2008). Siemens’s analysis of the lead-free and halogen-free movement is that once afew companies (largely Japanese) followed the “discussion” about directives and made a change (e.g., tohalogen free housings), then it became a competitive issue, and others were almost obliged to follow eventhough no formal legislation had been passed.

Lead-free connective technologies are of particular interest to the Design for Prototyping group. Most U.S.and European companies (including Siemens) believe that no lead-free solder can yet directly replace tin-lead. This is primarily due to the higher temperature requirements of the solder and consequently all relatedcomponents (chips, substrates, etc.).

A supply chain questionnaire of the German telecom industry indicated that they are very interested inhalogen-free products. However, most of the products currently available are in consumer electronics. Theprimary competition is coming from Japan. PIAD, Hitachi, Isola (AlliedSignal), Nelco, Mitsubishi,Matsushita, MC-Electronic, Sumitomo, and Toshiba all offer halogen-free products. Siemens believes thatavailable substitutes for composite (thermosets) and functional materials are too expensive and may havebeen introduced too early (with not enough information available).

Design for Environment

DFE is purely coupled with and considered equal to cost reduction. Siemens standard SN36350 for“Environmentally Compatible Products” (used since 1993) contains design guidelines, a list of substances ofconcern (only those which are legally controlled), and recommendations for plastic and metal selection.Among the guidelines listed under the section on procurement and manufacturing aspects are:

• Minimize the amount of materials used

• Minimize production waste by means of appropriate design

• Minimize product weight

• Minimize the variety of materials used

• Minimize the number and variety of components

• Employ recycled plastics where possible

• Minimize energy consumption in manufacturing

• Minimize amount of packaging


Guidelines under product usage aspects include:

• Design products to have a long useful life

• Design products to be easy to repair and upgrade

• Minimize energy consumption during idle status and during operation

Included in the disassembly and disposal guidelines are:

• Minimize the number and variety of connections

• Minimize the number of steps required for disassembly

• Use a small number of standard tools that require few changes in position

• Mark all plastic components suitable for recycling

• Avoid non-recyclable composites and coatings

Electronics End-of-Life

Germany has a controlled landfill price that is currently set at 1,500 DM per ton, so there are financialincentives to reuse and recycle end-of-life products. Computers that are less than two years old are donatedto schools (not always free of charge). Older units are recycled at a facility in Paderborn. At least 200 tonsper year are required to make recycling economic; the volume in Paderborn is about 6,000 t/a. Most of therevenue is from copper recovery. In addition, approximately 12 to 15 tons are resold. Computers that arefive to six years old or older are disassembled. Components are harvested and resold at spot market prices.The remainder is shredded by a third party. The light fraction (plastics) is landfilled rather than incinerated,in part due to concerns over dioxins and furans that may be generated when halogenated materials areimproperly burned. The need to establish an automatic identification method for halogen-free materials wasexpressed, as labels are not reliable. CRTs are recycled using a glass-to-glass process; leaded glass factionsare separated from the lead-free panels by cutting the tubes with a hot wire.

Take-back is done using a variety of organizational systems. Under the WEEE directive, manufacturers arebeing asked to take back product, but logistics will be expensive and may end up being done bycommunities. Computers and medical supplies are handled by Siemens directly. Other end-of-life productsare managed in cooperation with other companies or else outsourced. There is concern about southern EUnations because there is no local collection and recovery infrastructure. The EU wants companies to beresponsible for their own waste to help overcome this problem. Germany would like to see localmunicipalities, rather than individual companies, handle collection, dismantling, and separation, in part as ameans to creating low-skill jobs.

ISO 14001 and Supply Chain Issues

Siemens’s goal is to structure their environmental management systems to be compatible with ISO 14001.Each plant is expected to have an environmental management plan and must survive audits (or make changesif out of compliance). Siemens does not have a specific policy on ISO 14001 and they pursue formalcertification only if the customer requires it. Siemens suppliers are given guidelines, including a list ofsubstances to be avoided. They are considering moving towards a survey system.

The strict demands made by the automotive industry provide strong motivational drivers. Software used bycar manufacturing plants requires that suppliers provide a materials list for all materials up to 0.1%, plus aneight page list of specific materials, which is available on the internet. Suppliers may also be asked aboutspecific materials used in manufacturing processes, which can be difficult to obtain. For example, inconsidering the precursor to ABS the exact percentage of acrylonitrile may not be known.

Siemens has many group-specific programs for logistics based on customer modifications; they are thereforedifferent, and data transfer is sometimes not compatible. In addition, it is very expensive to get product ormaterials data, but Siemens plans to change this. Car manufacturers have material databases where suppliersenter information, but data consistency is a big problem.


Life-Cycle Assessment

Life-cycle assessment within Siemens includes a focus on metrology, life-cycle management, and life-cyclecosting. It is currently done on a limited basis within certain factories. Companies or departments within thecompany may ask for an LCA, but paying for it can be an issue. Siemens typically uses in-house software(that has already been paid for), but sometimes may use commercial software that has a low-cost site license.Siemens is looking at system-wide mass balance systems. Most commonly, they do simple input-outputanalyses, i.e., inputs over outputs produced.

One of the biggest challenges for Siemens, as for others attempting to do meaningful LCAs, is how toprioritize impacts. In general there are two positions on this within the European community. The EcoPointsystem, which is used in the Netherlands and by Philips in particular, is widely recognized because of itsrelative simplicity. It is an additive method that results in a single number, where the best solution is the onewith the lowest number of points. Siemens believes that EcoPoints (or Eco-indicators from which EcoPointsare derived) are not scientific, in part because impacts can not be assumed to be additive. They prefer insteadto use an expert decision method. The German government, which initially wanted to adopt the EcoPointsystem as a standard, agreed on an alternative code of conduct. This includes (1) a critical review (i.e., anaudit) and (2) a clear process with targets and expected results for a given product decided upon up front.This methodology follows the rules of ISO 14040, which does not include EcoPoints. There was significanteffort by a number of companies to keep EcoPoints out of ISO 14040. However, it should be acknowledgedthat some companies do like the EcoPoint system, largely because it is quick and inexpensive. And in fact, itcan be useful for simple screening.

FUTURE ISSUES

Siemens sees the next big issues as systems related. For example, one study suggests that the energydemand/consumption by information technologies will see exponential growth in the very near future.

Another point that was brought up was the observation that software upgrades can produce prematurehardware obsolescence. It was suggested that if new software had greater compatibility with older systems,the rate at which computers reached their useful end-of-life could be significantly reduced.

Lastly, the point was made that gradual technological evolutions do not continue indefinitely. There arealways technology jumps (such as CO2 cleans) or complete paradigm shifts that typically cannot be predicted.But by such planned innovation jumps, the environmental improvement needed worldwide to achieve globalreduction targets could be accelerated.

REFERENCES

Facts and Figures 2000. (Siemens brochure).

Corporate Technology. (Siemens brochure).

Environmental Report 1998. (with supplement for 1999). (Siemens brochure).

Principles: Environmental Protection Technical Safety, October 1998.

Environmentally Compatible Products: Part 1: Product Development Guidelines. (Siemens brochure).


Site: Technical University of BerlinInstitute for Machine Tools and Factory ManagementPTZ 2Pascalstrasse 8-9D-10587 BerlinGermany

Date: April 6, 2000

WTEC Attendees: E. Wolff (report author), D. Allen, D. Bauer, K. Rajurkar, J. Sutherland

Hosts: Univ.-Prof. Dr.-Ing. Gunther Seliger, Director, IWFDipl.-Ing.Waldemar Grudzien, Chief Engineer

INTRODUCTION

This institute also maintains a formal relationship with the Fraunhofer Institute; Professor Seliger maintainscontrol over both organizations. The combined staff level is at approximately 120; students provide valuableresources while at the same time gaining practical experiences in engineering fields.

Education and work at these institutes comprise the fields of mechanical engineering, electronics,information technology, and business management; environmental topics are an extension of these areas.

EBM ACTIVITIES

Rapid population growth is viewed as the source for the environmental challenges confronting this and futuregenerations. Professor Seliger sees an increase in the standard of living as a mechanism to reduce populationgrowth; increased standards of living have resulted in substantial population declines in highly developednations. The challenge is to additionally introduce environmentally benign levels of consumption.

“Selling use instead of products” could contribute to higher utilization rates in transportation andmanufacturing areas, thereby reducing the consumption of energy and materials resources. This would alsoreduce the number of transport vehicles and the resulting emissions.

Additionally, effective and efficient technical capabilities for recycling need to be developed. The institutehas engaged in a number of research projects for industrial clients in consumer electronics and appliances,and heads the efforts on behalf of DaimlerChrysler to disassemble automotive engines. Demonstrationprojects were presented to panel members involving research to clean and remove product contamination,develop vision recognition of fasteners (type and location, for robotic disassembly), mechanical and lasertrimming and removal of appliance sheet metal, and sensor capabilities to determine remaining service life ina number of mechanical and electronic components.

The life-cycle working group headed by Dipl. Ing. Grudzien have recognized that without the full knowledgeof market forces involving business cases and competitiveness, sustainable manufacturing will be difficult toachieve. Thus, work to develop educational and design tools for EBM emphasizes the need for a businesscase and value.

Other observations and comments from our hosts pointed to their belief that take-back requirements at timeshave been counterproductive, e.g., automotive brake re-conditioning. The brake rebuilding process had beenfacilitated by an organization that had no connection to the automotive OEM’s. Since take-back regulationsrequire the return of the automotive parts to the OEMs, the current re-conditioners have been sidelined.Thus, more careful analysis should be made before regulations are implemented.


Furthermore, Professor Seliger believes that the EBM challenges require better understanding of the globalsupply chain, scientific and economic issues. Global collaboration would improve the chances for successfulimplementation and avoid missing out on the full environmental benefits.

Trends in science and engineering education are not promising. In 1990 more than 60,000 first semesterengineering students continued their science and engineering education. By 1998 the number of thosecontinuing on had dropped to only 45,000; and market surveys for Germany indicated a shortage of 66,750engineers and 75,000 IT experts. With more than 230,000 students enrolled in Berlin schools, a considerableopportunity exists for increasing the enrollment into science and engineering fields.

The IWF Institute, under the direction of Professor Seliger, initiated a project (Theo Prax) wherein highschool students learn with university students and faculty in solving real industry problems. Industry submitsa problem to the university, which in turn contracts with a local high school to solve the problem. Projectslast from two to five months and range in cost from $1,000 to $5,000 per project. The State of Berlincontributes a similar amount, or more, depending upon the project. The university may elect to engage morethan one project team in providing multiple choices for solving industry’s problems. Current industries listedas using the Theo Prax program include BMW, Krone, Siemens, DaimlerChrysler, and Naiss GmbH, amongothers.


Site: Technical University of DenmarkDepartment of Manufacturing EngineeringDK 2800 LyngbyDenmark

Date: April 3, 2000

WTEC Attendees: T. Piwonka (report author), K. Rajurkar, J. Sutherland

Hosts: Prof. Leo AltingProf. Michael HauschildProf. Torben LenauNiki Bey (graduate student)

INTRODUCTION

Prof. Alting is one of the pioneers in the use of life-cycle assessment. He is currently head of the Departmentof Manufacturing Engineering at Technical University of Denmark (DTU). This department currently hasabout 150 students and researchers, of whom 27 are professors. They have extensive manufacturinglaboratories, very well equipped, in machining, powder metallurgy, metalworking, welding and casting.

EBM ACTIVITIES

Prof. Alting and his group emphasize sustainability in manufacturing. In addition to their work in LCA, theyalso emphasize micro-technological production (very small components), near net shape processing, andintelligent production systems. The Life-Cycle Center has been in existence for 15 years. It started as a resultof analyzing the problems in wastewater from plating systems.

They are well-connected internationally and collaborate, or have collaborated, with Prof. Kimura at theUniversity of Tokyo, Technical University of Berlin, and Cambridge University; and they are active in CIRP,especially the Life-Cycle Working Group. In addition, they have taken advantage of the Institute for ProductDevelopment (IPU) at DTU, which was founded in 1956. IPU is administratively and financially independentfrom DTU; it acts as a commercial arm, providing consultants and doing tasks for industry. They haveexpertise in “Process and Production Systematics, Recycling Technologies and Cleaner Production Systems.”Note that they use the term “cleaner” rather than “clean” to avoid implying that current industrial productionis not as clean as it might be. IPU’s support is primarily from industry; any funds left over when projects arecompleted are transferred to the Department of Manufacturing Engineering.

Legislation is now the main driving force for environmentally benign manufacturing in Europe. In the past,the focus was on point sources of pollution; today it is shifting to diffuse sources. They believe that apromising way to control diffuse sources is to control each product. This leads naturally to life-cycleassessment.

They have developed a concept called “Environmental Design of Industrial Products” (EDIP). It includesmethodology, guidelines, PC software, and implementation help. They have written two books:Environmental Assessment of Products, Volume 1: Methodology, Tools, Techniques and Case Studies, andVolume II: Scientific Background (ISBN 0 412 80800 5 and ISBN 0412 80810 2). Both have been translatedinto English and are now being translated into Japanese. This methodology emphasizes normalization of theenvironmental load related to a product against what an average person uses or loads the environment. Theoriginal “person” was an average Dane, but at present the average person is being converted into the averageEuropean.

The EDIP program allows a designer to model the product life cycle as a decision support aid. The softwareis designed to permit the choice of which potential solution is best, a comparison of how much better it isthan other solutions.


As this model may take some time to run, and is limited by lack of data (much of the data needed for themodel is proprietary to companies), a simplified version of the program is available for rapid assessment ofareas where the more detailed model may be useful. This model is known as “MECO” for the matrix it uses.This is shown below:

Table C.1

Life-cycle StageCauses of Environmental Impact

Extraction of RawMaterials

ManufacturingStage

UseStage

DisposalStage

Materials

Energy

Chemicals

Other

They made the point that the greatest potential for influencing the environmental performance of a product isat the beginning of the design stage, when knowledge about the product is at its least. They also pointed outthat their model does not include ethical or societal concerns. The EDIP method does, however, assessworking environment. The importance of considering the environmental impact of a product is increased inEurope by the EU initiative of “Integrated Product Policy” that includes eco-labeling, government purchasingguidelines and consumer education. LCA is used in implementing this policy, with the government payingfor the LCAs.

DTU currently offers a course in LCA. The course carries 10 credits with an expected workload of 16 hoursper week during the semester, and includes working out a case study in industry.

Professor Lenau gave a number of examples. He noted that, in Denmark, plastic beverage containers aremade of heavier gauge plastic than in the U.S., and re-used up to 20-30 times. He also commented on thelife-cycle costs of wool, cotton and polyester. He noted that process energy was lost when plastics wereincinerated, and spoke of reading about a building where fiber optics are used to transmit sunlight throughoutthe building instead of using electric lights (at night a plasma light source is used). He also commented on thepotential to use human power through piezoelectric devices in low power-consuming products such asremote keyless entry systems in cars, and emphasized that one must know the alternatives in preparing anLCA.

DTU has established a Web site (www.designinsite.dk) that helps designers learn about new materials ormanufacturing processes. They also offer an annual course in integration of design in engineering andbusiness. The course is limited to 30 students, ten each from design, business and engineering.

One more concept that is being developed is that of the “oil-point” (OP). This is a method of normalizingenergy usage in terms of the amount of energy contained in one kg of crude oil (45 MJ). Toxicologicaleffects are omitted, and care is needed in treating energy data (efficiency factors must be included). Someexamples include the following:

• PET resin (resource and processing) = 1.7 OP

• Steel (processing) = 0.7 OP

• Injection molding (energy consumption) = 0.4 OP

• Electricity (European average) = 0.3 OP

One detailed study of using wood window frames or steel reinforced PVC window frames yielded the resultthat the wood had a score of 4.5 OP, while the PVC score was 14.3 OP.

They concluded with indicating that they believed that current important challenges to EBM in Europe todayinclude the problems of recyclability of products, reduction of energy consumption, increasing productcomplication, and the lack of adequate databases for accurate LCAs.


Site: University of StuttgartInstitute for Polymer Testing and Polymer Science (IKP)Pfaffenwaldring 32D-70569 Stuttgart-VaihingenGermany

Date Visited: April 4, 2000

WTEC Attendees: D. Bauer (report author), D. Allen, T. Gutowski, K. Rajurkar, J. Sutherland, E. Wolff

Hosts: Prof. Dr.-Ing. Peter EyererDipl.-Ing. Martin BaitzDipl.-Ing. Johannes Kreissig

BACKGROUND

Professor Eyerer is the Chair for Material Science at IKP and also the Director of the Fraunhofer Institute forChemical Technology (ICT) in Pfinztal. Together, the two institutes have a wide-ranging scope of polymer-related research, from renewable resources to polymer processing to life-cycle engineering. IKP has about95 researchers and DM7 million annual budget. ICT has 335 researchers and a DM40 million annual budget.The main international LCA research collaboration is between ICT, IKP, ETH (Switzerland), and MIT.

LCA SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT AND PROCESS DATA COLLECTION

IKP has developed an LCA software package, GABi3 (we received demo samples of this). The vision forGaBi3 software is to support engineering decisions. Process data are aggregated over a global network ofdata sources. These data sources were found mostly by tracing back European products through their supplychains. Material and energy flows, as well as time and costs, are traceable through the product manufactureprocess chain. Some emissions data are available, though the user generally has to supply the cost structure.Attributing the cost of emissions was acknowledged to be a challenge. There is also work within the groupon developing an environmental assessment, which translates impact categories (GWP, POCP, AP, EP,Ecotoxicity, Human Toxicity, etc.) into three safeguard subject categories (human health, ecological health,and resource depletion).

Data management is challenging. Rapidly changing areas, such as polymer production, are on their third setof data, whereas cement is still on its first data set. Data are generally averaged across an industry. Someprocess information is kept opaque for company proprietary reasons.

LCA is encouraging different types of system analysis and improvement, such as tradeoffs between localemissions reductions and increases in energy use. The tool is used both to recommend areas for government-sponsored research, and for industrial decision-making. Companies considering using LCA are mostconvincible when there is an economic argument.

BEST AVAILBLE POLYMER TECHNOLOGIES

PVC

Because of the chlorine content, it is problematic to incinerate PVC. Thus, there is focus on achieving closedloop recycling. There is a project to recycle PVC window frames. The company (Veka) is producing newwindow frames with mixed content (20-25% recycled). Used windows are taken to one of several locationswhere they are shredded, separated, and recycled. They are also working on a window frame eco-labelingprogram.


Polyethylene/Polypropylene, Nylon

In both cases, the strategy was to optimize a process sequence for energy and waste through introduction ofcatalysts and additives.

MOTIVATIONS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL WORK WITHIN INDUSTRY

Cost is a key motivator, but sometimes costs do not drive decisions in environmentally preferable directions.

Though the environmental gut feeling is that recycling is good, recycling is not always environmentallypreferred, as benefits may be offset by energy-related impacts, particularly from transportation. The opinionexpressed is that in Germany the price of energy is not high enough (by a factor of 3) to internalize theenvironmental implications of energy. Another important recycling, processing, and transportation decisionis when to separate and when to shred. If materials for recycling are shipped prior to shredding, then theyoccupy a large volume-unit mass, so shredding earlier may be better, but this requires distributed processing.Also there is the question of whether/how to sort prior to shredding.

Construction material recycling is currently difficult because landfill disposal of these materials is currentlyrelatively cheap (because in 2005 disposal of construction materials in landfills will no longer be allowed,and thus there is a current excess landfill capacity).

In the automotive industry, there are competing objectives of 90-95% recyclability and dramatic increases infuel efficiency. This makes development of new automotive materials, such as lightweight composites,particularly challenging

CURRENT AND FUTURE RESEARCH EFFORTS

There is some current work integrating process model-based LCA with economic environmental input/outputanalyses.

A major current and future application of polymers is fuel cells.

EDUCATION

Environmental issues are intensely integrated into the curriculum in Germany, particularly in elementaryschool. The integration there may not be balanced enough. In the universities and technical schools there isa more realistic balance, with some environmental course sequences required and also integration ofenvironmental factors into established courses. For example Peter Eyerer’s course is now 25%environmental.


Site: University of Technology–AachenInstitute of Metal FormingIntzestrasse 1052072 AachenGermany

Date: April 10, 2000

WTEC Attendees: E. Wolff (report author), D. Allen, D. Bauer, K. Rajurkar, J. Sutherland

Hosts: Professor Dr.-Ing. R. Kopp, Director, Institute of Metal FormingDipl.-Ing. A. Ebert, Sheet Metal FormingDipl.-Ing. T. Möller, Thixo FormingDipl.-Ing. K. Kober, Surface TechnologyDipl.-Ing. F. Hageman, Casting/FormingDipl.-Ing. T. Hülshorst, Ring Rolling

INTRODUCTION

Professor Kopp described the institute’s facilities and departmental organization. Six research groups arefocused as follows:

• Casting/forming (twin roll casting)

• Hot forming (open die forging, incremental forging, thixo forging, ring rolling, longitudinal rolling,extrusion)

• Cold forming (drawing, material cycles, lead optimization, composite structures, shot peen forming,forming by load heading)

• Computer applications (CAD/CAE/CAM, FEM simulation)

• Optimization lab (physical simulation and FEM simulations for process optimization, computer-aidedoptimization)

• Material data (stress strain curves, thermal properties, models for material specification, microstructuresimulation and process layout)

RESEARCH AREAS

The principal research thrust is minimization of energy and materials consumption via process shortening,thermo-mechanical treatment, re-use, net shape, lightweight construction, simulation and optimization. Theteam visited the facilities for thin strip casting now utilized by Thyssen Krupp Stahl AG, where we observed:

• the flexible sheet rolling process that offers load-optimized sheet material for structural automotiveapplication

• Thixo-forging of aluminum components

• incremental forging of structural aircraft aluminum parts

• shot peen forming of large conical sections

• surface quality determination of automotive coiled sheets

• optimization of hot formed rolled rings

• materials data generation for high speed, high temperature forming processes


Several of these processes were in prototype stages and already involved in technology transfer withindustrial partners. Comparison between former processes and processes that had eliminated certainoperations showed substantial energy and cost savings—e.g., fivefold reduction in thin-strip casting vs. slabcasting and hot rolling, 48% reduction in materials consumption through incremental forging, 25% passengercar cross member weight reduction from flexible rolling.

Other industrial projects had explored high strength laminated sheet incorporating steel wire and plastic meshfor weight reduction; reclaiming of recycled automotive body parts; and extending Thixo forging into steelmaterials.

Professor Kopp has been a principal collaborator in international efforts to develop EBM methodologies andestablish environmental initiatives on the campus of UT Aachen with more than 60 institutes and facultycollaborating. Professor Kopp shared his views and offered recommendations in the following areas:

• Exploring higher speeds and pressures in forming operations

• Combining lasers with forming

• Microstructures and chemistries that offer improved forming processes

• Additionally, more accurate formability measurements involving temperatures, speed, and pressure, andsimulation tools that can predict forming at a micro structure scale


Site: AB VolvoDept. 870 VHKSE-405 08 GoteborgSweden

Date: April 5, 2000

WTEC Attendees: D. Thurston (report author), B. Bras, D. Durham, T. Gutowski, R. Horning,C. Murphy, T. Piwonka

Hosts: Dr. Lena Gevert, Director, Environmental AffairsDr. Tomas Rydberg

BACKGROUND

Professor Tim Gutowski first delivered an introductory talk describing WTEC and our mission. Dr. Gevertthen distributed copies of the Volvo Annual Report (which includes some environmental programinformation), a more detailed Volvo Environmental Report, and another environmental report. Dr. Gevertthen delivered a comprehensive and well-organized overview of Volvo’s environmental program.

Since the divestiture of their automotive line to Ford, Volvo has been focusing on its commercial productlines. At present, the main product lines are trucks and buses, which account for 57% of total sales.Aerospace engine services are a growing portion of their business. Each of these product areas servesindustrial-based customers, rather than consumer-based.

Volvo views itself as having evolved from a Swedish company into a global corporation based in Sweden.They do business in different ways in different parts of the world, but still maintain their “three core valuesof Quality, Safety and the Environment.” Safety is their main core value, while quality and the environmentare viewed as extensions of the core value of safety. Company culture is top-down, with strong guidancefrom top executives, who are also concerned with empowering local plants. Corporate culture emphasizesenvironmentalism.

ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAM

Before its divestiture, the environmental program centered on the automotive company, which was theenvironmental “driver” for the other Volvo companies. Since the media pays much less attention to theenvironmental impacts of commercial products than to automobiles, it is unclear precisely how Volvo’scommitment to the environment will evolve. Volvo views itself as the environmental leader in thetransportation industry. The Volvo Environmental Prize is given to scientists, and is likened to a Nobel Prizefor the environment. They expect that their commitment to the environment will give them a competitiveedge by following four strategies: (1) a holistic approach which analyzes a complete global value chain, (2)continuous quality improvement, (3) technological development, and (4) resource efficiency.

Volvo considers global warming to be a significant concern, perhaps the most important environmentalimpact facing society today. A valuable lesson was learned after Volvo spent significant funds to build “theworld’s cleanest paint shop” in 1995. The water-based paint system decreased emissions, but increasedenergy requirements, energy costs, and also increased environmental impacts from energy production. Theirfocus has thus shifted from manufacturing plant emissions to product emissions. There are three main thruststo their efforts: (1) decrease CO2 emissions by decreasing fuel consumption, (2) decrease CO2 emissions bydeveloping alternative fuels, and (3) decrease exhaust emissions.


Fuel consumption

Decrease in fuel consumption is the primary focus of Volvo’s effort to decrease CO2 emissions. The threeapproaches taken are load optimization, engine and transmission design, and traffic planning/informationsystems.

Alternative fuels

Volvo is the largest producer of natural gas buses in Europe. They commented that they have not yet seen afully satisfactory solution to the problem of alternative fuels or power sources for their products. The best betso far is methane. They would like to use fuel cells, but do not believe that any current designs aresatisfactory for their products. They are concerned that the infrastructure for alternative fuel supply is notestablished. Hybrid power plants are acceptable, but not ideal. Volvo has developed demonstration vehiclesthat use hybrid and fuel cell technologies.

Decrease exhaust emissions

Buses are the biggest problem in regards to emissions, especially city buses. Trucks are the next biggest. Themain effort is in design of engines and engine control equipment. Fuels which reduce sulfur, lead andaromatic emissions are also being explored. The different legal requirements for emissions testing presentdifficulties. Although the regulations tend to catch up with one another by leap-frogging between Europe andthe U.S. approximately every four years, one standard regulatory system would be preferred. Although Volvoremanufactures engines, it does so only to the original specifications, not current specifications.

The following topics were also discussed:

Recycling

There is some discussion about instituting take-back and recycling requirements for trucks and buses, similarto those for automobiles.

Vendors

Vendors are viewed as part of the complete value chain. All Volvo suppliers must be ISO 9000 compliant, aswell as ISO 14000 compliant (or develop an action plan for compliance). This is part of encouraging leanmanufacturing. Volvo views itself as a world leader in design and manufacturing technology, and they expecttheir Tier 1 suppliers to be world leaders also. For this reason, they have a small, but high quality supplierbase, and emphasize teaming with suppliers in design and manufacturing development.

Manufacturing

As mentioned above, the corporate focus has shifted from manufacturing plant emissions to productemissions since global warming is such a key issue. Manufacturing emissions are viewed as a local issue. Acorporate environmental auditor ensures compliance with local standards. In some arenas, though, there is amore stringent corporate “decency limit,” and a “black list” of chemicals that plants are not allowed to use,even though they may be legal locally, as well as a “gray list” of materials that should be phased out. Thegoal is to be the best plant locally.

Life-cycle Analysis

Volvo was an initiator of the LCA concept, ahead of the ISO process. They have developed EP(environmental priority system) an in-house LCA tool. Tradeoff analysis is the most difficult problem,particularly tradeoffs between economic and environmental impacts. Currently, these tradeoffs are achievedthrough discussion and compromise, rather than analysis. In Sweden, a consequence analysis for productsmust be performed. This is a more balanced approach than the U.S. waste-stream specific focus.


TOUR OF TRUCK ASSEMBLY PLANT

The tour of the truck assembly plant was very interesting. They have converted all drilling operations in theframe to punching and laser cutting, thereby allowing recovery of the material removed. Their frame bendingoperation is done cold, on a series of roll formers. One observation was that all of the shaping, punching andlaser cutting equipment was encased in cubicles that were designed to minimize plant noise. Assembly isdone by teams. There are two different assembly practices. For the smaller trucks that are made in largerquantities, a modified assembly line is used. For larger trucks, usually ordered in much smaller quantities,assembly “docks” are used, with each team turning out three trucks a day. Virtually all trucks are customordered.

174

APPENDIX D. SITE REPORTS—JAPAN

Site: Fuji Xerox (Ebina plant)2274 Hongo, EbinaKanagawa, 243-0494Japan

Date: October 19, 1999

WTEC Attendees: B. Bras (report author), H. Morishita, F. Thompson, D. Thurston, E. Wolff

Hosts: Dr. Takashi Nakagami, Asset Recovery Management DepartmentTakako Hamashima, Asset Recovery Management Department

BACKGROUND

Mr. Nakagami provided a presentation on asset recovery in Fuji Xerox, including a video, as well as a planttour.

Until around 1965, Fuji Xerox’s environmental focus was on pollution at a specific area. A major shift camewith the energy crises, and the focus shifted towards energy saving. Now, the focus is on globalenvironmental issues. The basic motivators for Fuji Xerox asset recovery in Japan are that Japan has no roomfor landfills and that recycling is a necessity. In the past, the focus was on a “one way economy” but now anexpansion to a “re-circulating economic system” has been introduced.

EBM ACTIVITIES

A key strategy is to promote reuse of resources to reduce landfill close to zero. To do that, the following twoitems are pursued:

• Recirculatory recycling system

• Part reuse system that enables the same quality assurance as with newly built parts

Dr. Nakagami explained Fuji Xerox’s process. Notable is that all parts are checked, repaired if needed, etc.,and fed back to an integrated production line.

Key steps to achieve this are:

• Structure the recycle loop, i.e., establish the infrastructure and ensure that a basic recycling loop isestablished.

• Increase the recycling rate, i.e., strive for shorter paths through the recycling loop. This implies thatproduct recycling is better than material recycling.

• Speed up the loop, i.e., make it all go faster.

Answering a question on how this is achieved, Dr. Nakagami explained that Fuji Xerox has design guidelinesfor longer life, disassembly, etc., so a designer focuses on recycling as part of the other requirements. FujiXerox exploits the longer life that printed circuit boards now have, compared to the past.

Warranty and Service

To ensure the quality assurance of recycled parts, the status of usage at the user is evaluated by means of thecopy counter. Furthermore, the remaining life of parts is estimated for parts with a life longer than a singleusage life. These two indicators are combined into a system to assure part quality. Parts from the assetrecovery line are placed next to the supplier’s new parts and are treated as equal.

Appendix D. Site Reports—Japan 175

Warranty and service costs have not changed due to part reuse, but are a very important issue. Reliability istracked carefully. Data from the field is fed back by maintenance and service personnel directly throughcentral databases. These data allow Fuji Xerox to employ Weibull analysis, i.e., statistical life estimation.Visual quality inspections are also made in the plant itself. Regarding life times, typical use time for a35 page per minute (ppm) copier is three years, and 115 ppm copiers typically stay around eight years at asingle customer.

Design Guidelines

In 1995, a Xerox worldwide Design for Recycling Guideline I was established, which focused on materialrecycling. An improved version (DFR Guideline II) will focus on designing for longer life, common design,DFD, use of reusable material, separation/modularization of contamination and/or failing parts. Trade-offsexist between design and production, and are also a big issue in Fuji Xerox. Segmentation is made betweenfast and slowly changing technology when parts are designed. Decisions are made about which customerrequirements will remain stable and which will not. In the past, design goals were focused on quality, cost,and delivery; now environment has been added.

Fuji Xerox also pursues so-called product plan for the life cycle (PFL). Currently the goal is to (1) recycle tothe same product and (2) recycle to the same series, but there is no real PFL (yet). PFL includes simulationof hulk collection, concept of three product generations, modular design concept.

Collection and Reuse Ratios

Fuji Xerox’s collection ratio through direct channels is 96%. Collection through indirect channels (retailers,etc.) is 60% and needs improvement. Efforts are focused on increased volume of used machine collection,reduction of logistics costs by improved loading efficiency and reduced warehouse costs, and more efficienthulk using an information system for hulk use (this already exists for direct channels, but not for the indirectchannels).

There are recycled parts in 27 products. The part reuse ratio is about 40%. Short-term improvements arefocused on making the line more flexible and improved quality assurance. Long-term efforts will befocusing on automatic cleaning systems, design for disassembly and detachment, design for repair, anddesign for automatic inspection.

In 1998, 18.5% of products incorporated recycled parts. The goal is to boost this to 25% in the year 2000.The part reuse ratio is planned to increase from 40% (1998) to 50% in 2000. Landfill (from the directchannels) will be reduced from 14.9% to zero in 2000. The zero target is technically no problem, butoperationally it is very difficult and partnerships are needed.

De-manufacturing Operation

Fuji Xerox (Japan), Xerox Limited (Europe) and Xerox (United States) all have their own asset recoverylines. Representatives meet about twice a year to consult each other. In Japan, all recovered machines arebrought to the Fuji Xerox Ebina plant, which has an integrated de-manufacture-manufacture production line.The Ebina de-manufacturing line is for recycling/reuse of parts and subassemblies. An important function ofthe line is to sort the parts. Products are split into three groups according to the copy volume. A truck comesabout five times daily from a warehouse depending on the plant needs. Machines are boxed to avoidtransportation damage. Autonomous Guided Vehicles (AGVs) are used for in-plant transportation ofmaterial.

The main stages of the de-manufacture process are as follows:

• Each machine is unboxed and checked for basic operation by plugging it in and making a test copy.

• Covers are removed.

• Non-reusable parts are sorted and packed for material recycling. These are taken away by materialrecyclers, with the exception of ABS plastics which are recycled directly for Fuji Xerox by a companyfor new outer covers.

Appendix D. Site Reports—Japan176

• Each mechanism is cleaned from dust and toner using an automatic (robotic) dry-ice blast cleaning set-up.

• The machines arrive at the disassembly line where non-reusable and reusable parts are manuallydisassembled (using pneumatic tools) and sorted. Sorting relies on a worker’s understanding. Eachdisassembly station has a manual with information for the worker regarding the products, parts, andactions to be taken. Panelists observed that most workers were relatively young and, according to ourhosts, from a temp agency.

• After (partial) disassembly, further cleaning is undertaken at an air cleaning station, a wet cleaningstation (detergent & hot water), and another robotic dry-ice blasting station. The robot reads a bar codeon the subassembly to be cleaned and automatically starts the programmed cleaning path.

• Re-assembly is done to the sub-unit level using the same process as the original supplier uses. Smallparts are checked at different areas.

• Quality checks are performed.

• Re-assembled units are staged for shipping to the assembly plant. The entire inventory is shipped everyday to the assembly area.

In the assembly area (which is housed in a different, but connected building), rebuilt and new parts/units areall staged together and treated the same. The assembly lines use a lean production paradigm. The lowvolume line only has four basic products, but many varieties exist for the different markets. Workers knowthat a different product is being assembled from the previous one by a simple flag raised on the product tray.The speed of the kitting AGVs is controlled to match the speed of the assembly. The final inspection iscomputer assisted. Adjustments are made to set printing properties, etc., and safety checks are done usinghigh voltage testing.

Profitability and Competition

Currently, there is still a loss in the recycling business, but it is expected that it will become profitable whenthe volume increases. The customers, however, like what Fuji Xerox has done and the Green PurchasingNetwork program requires recycling. According to our hosts, the first motivation came from the UnitedStates where Xerox started reuse. Secondly, Fuji Xerox used to be a rental business so take-back and reusewas a natural extension of their business. Thirdly, the landfill problem provides motivation.

Down the road, Fuji Xerox sees the need to increase the life at the customer by increased reliability and alsoto make upgrades by changing parts at the customer rather than in-plant upgrades.

Fuji Xerox is currently the benchmark with regards to collection volume, not only from rental customers butalso non-rental, and with regards to the production volume of copiers including recycled parts compared toother companies. But it was stated that Canon has a good toner cartridge recycling program, and Ricoh isalso very open with respect to environmental issues to the customer.

Fuji Xerox applied for ISO 14000 certification two years ago. Its current ISO 14000 focus is on includingsuppliers.

REFERENCES

“Recycling of Fuji Xerox Products,” Fuji Xerox, brochure no. ARM-003


Site: Hitachi Production Engineering Research Laboratory (PERL)292 Yoshido-cho, Totsuka, YokohamaKanagawa, 244-0817Japan


WTEC attendees: D. Thurston (report author), D. Bauer, B. Bras, T. Gutowski, H. Morishita, C. Murphy,T. Piwonka, P. Sheng, J. Sutherland, F. Thompson, E. Wolff

Hosts: Dr. M. TakahashiDr. T. KameiDr. H. YamaguchiMr. T. OhashiMr. K. SerizawaMr. M. UnoMs. H. Shimokawa

INTRODUCTION

Dr. Takahashi provided a welcome and introduction, and described their programs. PERL is one of sevenHitachi corporate laboratories. Their mission is development of new production processes, facilities andsystems, and productivity improvement. Environmental projects are one of four areas PERL pursues in itsmission of total cost minimization. The other three are in the areas of engineering, production, and logistics.Hitachi’s environmental policy includes ISO 14001 certification for all Hitachi sites and affiliates by the endof 1999. Other goals are a 20% reduction in energy consumption (compared with 1990 values) and a 90%reduction in waste by 2010 (compared with 1991). Also, product assessments include consideration ofincreased use of recycled materials, reduction in disassembly time, and achieving 100% lead-free solderingfor new products by 2002.

MAJOR PROJECTS

Lead-free Soldering

A national project in Japan concerning the lead-free soldering development effort at Hitachi began inJanuary, 1999 and is expected to continue through March, 2000. It was initially funded through MITI andthen NEDO (New Energy and Industrial Technology Development Organization) for 340M yen. A numberof companies and organizations are involved in this effort. It includes JEIDA’s project, which equipmentsuppliers mostly join, working on application technologies, Japan Welding Association’s project, addressingstandardization of lead-free solder, and EIAJ’s project (which mostly parts suppliers join) evaluating platingtechnologies and heat resistance. Hitachi joined all three projects. In the case of JEIDA’s project, severaldifferent Pb-free solders were discussed, including silver-containing solder (Sn/Ag/Cu) for reflow or wave-solder applications, tin-copper binary solder (Sn/Cu) for wave-solder, bismuth-containing solders(Sn/Ag/Bi/Cu, Sn/Ag/Bi/Cu/Ge, and Sn/Ag/Bi) for reflow applications, and low-temperature solder(Sn/Bi/Ag) for reflow or wave-solder.

The issues surrounding lead-free solder include composition and technology, life-estimates of the joints(thermal fatigue), and solder process construction. All solders undergo reliability testing. Temperaturecycling condition is from –55 to +125°C (equivalent to MIL STD Condition B). The thermal fatigue life oflead-free solders was compared with standard Sn-Pb solder for some packages. In the case of 50-pin TSOP,standard Sn-Pb solder survived around 750 cycles, but the high temperature lead-free solder failed around800 cycles; the mid-temperature lead-free solder failed around 500 cycles; and the low-temperature solderfailed around 200 cycles. 20-pin SOPs and 208-pin QFPs were also tested.

Lead reduction targets are 50% by March of 2000 and 100% by March of 2002 for new models.


Recyclability Evaluation Method (REM)

The quantitative attributes of REM are recycle expense index, estimated value, estimated recyclability rate,and a recyclability/disassemblability evaluation score, etc. The goal is to provide designers with a tool tocompare recyclability of various design options. The user inputs part name, material, and mass, and symbolswhich indicate the required disassembly operation. There are approximately 20 types of disassemblyoperation elements, categorized by movement, tool operations, etc. Examples include upward movement,screw rotation and cutting. Model output includes estimated disassembly time and total recycling expense.REM is offered to contracted users through the internet (http://ecoassist.omika.hitachi.co.jp).

Inverse Manufacturing Forum and Information Exchange System

The Inverse Manufacturing Forum was established in December 1996. Priorities are IT and systemengineering for circulating society, towards evolution to a post mass-production paradigm. The process isviewed as, ideally, a horizontal loop, or at worst a cascading loop, where waste material from onemanufacturing process or product (at the end of its useful life) is used as a part of the same product or at leasta raw material for another product or process. A number of companies are working toward this goal—forexample, Toyota in its 5R program (Refine, Reduce, Reuse, Recycle and Retrieve Energy) and Ricoh in itsComet Circle, which connects life-cycle phases. The forum plans strategies, reviews research themes, andarranges projects. The forum has many goals, including quantitative analysis of the performance of inversemanufacturing efforts.

In the Information Exchange System, a systems approach is taken to develop a method for organizing andcommunicating information that enable to circulation of various phases of products (new, grade-up, andrecycled ones) among manufacturers, users and recyclers, etc. This is one of Hitachi’s most active projects,and is sponsored by MITI through MSTC (Manufacturing Science Technology Center). A prototype systemis posted on a Web site (http://ecoassist.omika.hitachi.co.jp. or http://www.mstc.or.jp/m-1db/). Early stagemodels for major home appliances and PCs were developed to test the concept. This prototype system isstructured to include product, process and recycling data between manufacturers and recyclers. Hitachi iscurrently working on the next phase, an extension of this system which provides data with respect to users’needs, maintenance parts, recycled parts, recycling process, etc., throughout each phase of the life cycle,from manufacturing through delivery, use, maintenance, collection and end-processing. The concept ofproduct “circulation or re-use” during its useful life is again employed. One major task remaining is todevelop a standardized format for information input and output.

One problem area is the market economics of recycled materials (recycled materials are often moreexpensive than new materials). Mr. Ohashi offered his personal opinion that an even more drastic systemsengineering, feed-forward approach needs to be taken. This might include governmental policy aimed atincreasing the “value” of materials and energy, and encouraging the circulation of used parts and materials(perhaps through policy or taxation programs) in order to redress the value balance between too cheapmaterials/energy (and labor and information) and more expensive recycled materials. He also feels thatalthough technology is vital in order to raise the quality of the solution, technology can play only a partnerrole (together with legal, economic, social policies, etc.) in an effort to increase society’s and individuals’sense of responsibility toward the environment. Such comprehensive activities alone enable feed-forwardsocial movement that can force a drastic change.

SUMMARY

Hitachi is working in several different areas of environmentally benign manufacturing, including lead-freesoldering, evaluation methods for recycling, inverse manufacturing, and recycling information exchangesystems. They have clearly articulated a policy to pursue environmentally conscious design andmanufacturing in a variety of areas, and quantified specific goals and target dates. More detail can be foundin the references listed below.


REFERENCES

Ohashi, T. “Design Technology and I.T. for Recycling for Circulating Society”.

Ohashi, T., T. Ishida, Y. Hiroshige, T. Urakami, T. Midorikawa, and M. Uno. 1999. Ecological Information System –Data Exchange System Between Manufacturers and Recyclers. IEEE, pp. 143-147*

Nishi, T., T. Ohashi, Y. Hiroshige, M. Hirano, and K. Ueno. 1999. Study on TV Recyclability. IEEE, pp. 278-280 *

For Planet Earth: Hitachi’s Approach to Environmental Issues. (Hitachi brochure).


Site: Horiba, Ltd.2, Miyanohigashi-cho, Kisshoin, Minami-kuKyoto, 601-8510Japan


WTEC Attendees: T. Piwonka (report author), H. Morishita, J. Sutherland

Hosts: Keiichi Handa, Planning and Development Department, Analytical Equipment &Systems Division

Katsumi Nagasawa, Senior Manager, Analytical Equipment & Systems DivisionHajime Mikasa, Certified Environment Assessor, Manager, Technical Information

Office

BACKGROUND

Horiba is a manufacturer of analytical equipment used to monitor automobile emissions, smoke stackemissions, and air and water quality, located in Kyoto. It also makes medical products and semiconductorinspection systems. The company was founded in 1945 and incorporated in 1953. The company started as aresult of the development of a portable pH meter by its founder, Dr. Masao Horiba. He continues to bechairman of the board; his son is president of the company. Horiba products are sold internationally, and thecompany had annual consolidated sales of $575 million for the year ending March, 1999. About 5% of itsrevenues are plowed back into the company for product research. One company slogan is to be the “ultraquick supplier” of instruments to customers.

Their instruments are based primarily on pH, infrared and X-ray analysis. A specialty is integrated emissiontest systems for automotive (gasoline and diesel) engines. These total engine performance systems are soldto automotive companies (Kubota indicated that they use them), where they are used in the development ofclean engines. They have an emission test “cell” installed in Ann Arbor, MI for use by U.S. automotivecustomers.

EBM ACTIVITIES

Horiba makes a variety of air pollution monitoring systems for installation in stacks and to measure ambientair conditions. Their analyzers are mostly compound-specific, measuring CO2, oxygen, etc. At the presenttime they are working on developing instruments to detect volatile organic compounds, notably aromatichydrocarbons (benzene, toluene and xylene), aldehydes, and chlorinated hydrocarbons in air and soil. Theyanticipate that regulations on odor pollution may appear in Japan at some time in the intermediate future, andare working to identify specific compounds that may be regulated.

In water quality, they offer a checker that measures 13 items, including pH, conductivity, turbidity andtemperature, and is equipped with a global positioning system for three dimensional mapping of lakes andrivers, as well as an oil content analyzer for waterways. Their instruments monitor the effect of acid rain inhundreds of locations in Japan; they consider that the network thus set up is an “honest” system of keepingtrack of the effects of acid rain. They have other checkers for water quality and continue to develop newinstruments in anticipation of more stringent environmental regulations on water quality.

They also manufacture analyzers to measure particulate matter and, in some cases, the chemical make-up ofparticulate emissions, using an infrared spectrophotometer database.

They supply analytical services on a spot basis for companies as a sales service, to encourage customers tobuy their equipment. They also supply calibration services for those customers that have purchased theirequipment; some of the calibration is provided automatically by data loggers and a wide area network withtheir customers. They have branches worldwide that monitor the performance of the instruments they sell in


those countries. They offer upgrade kits for some of their instruments to accommodate more stringentregulations that may come along. They will beta-test their new instruments at selected customers.

As increasingly restrictive pollution regulations mean more business for them, they are enthusiastic aboutthem. However, they are concerned that some regulations may lead to requirements for analytical precisionthat are very difficult to meet. They donated an air monitoring system to the city of Kyoto that displaysairborne SOx, NOx, and CO2 contents of the air in the city; it displays its readings in a public square.

Specific concerns for the future include development of better methods for measuring hydrocarbonemissions, lower concentrations of regulated substances, and small air-quality devices for application to real-time control of auto emissions. Other substances that they believe they will be asked to measure includeorganic chromates, PFCs, noxious odors (ammonia, hydrogen sulfide) and those compounds that affectinterior air quality.

They publish (in Japanese with English abstracts, sometimes extended) a periodic review of technical reports.In addition, information about their products is available at their Web site (www.horiba.co.jp, in Japanese orEnglish).


Site: Kubota Corporation1-12-47 Shikidu-Higashi, Naniwa-kuOsaka, 556-8601Japan


WTEC Attendees: J. Sutherland (author), H. Morishita, T. Piwonka

Hosts: Hiroyuki Kisaka, Executive Managing DirectorYasunori Shiraishi, General Manager, Engine Engineering DepartmentYoshikazu Yamada, General Manager, Environmental Protection Dept.Takeo Morimoto, Senior Associate Engineer, Environmental Protection Dept.Kazuyuki Sunabe, Deputy Mgr., Environmental Protection Dept., Section Mgr.

INTRODUCTION

Several brochures were distributed and a videotape describing Kubota’s activities was shown. Kubota’sbusiness interests include: farm and industrial machinery; pipe and fluid systems engineering; environmentalcontrol plants; housing materials and utilities; materials; and air conditioning equipment. According to thehosts, all Kubota plants will be ISO 14001 certified by the end of 2000.

EBM ACTIVITIES

Kubota has established five thrust areas as part of its “Environment-Friendly Corporate Activities”:

• Environment friendly products—directed at product and technology development

• Zero emission—directed at product development and manufacturing

• Energy and resources conservation—directed at product development and manufacturing

• Local environmental conservation and comfortable work shop—for regional and working environments

• Efficient environmental management system—for business processes

Kubota has $8 billion in sales per year, and about 0.5% of this amount ($40 million) is associated with themanagement of environmental issues. The breakdown for this is as follows: personnel, $9 million; solidwaste management, $10 million; investment in new equipment/facilities, $16 million; other, $4 million. As acomparison, the research and development budget is $400 million. It was noted that the term “environmentalaccounting” has begun to be used, but is far from being fully implemented. They view environmentalregulations not as something to be fought; rather, environmental costs are viewed as taxes. Kubota isworking to make their plants in Japan as green as possible, and are compliant with customs/regulations inother countries. The energy costs for Kubota are approximately 2% of their sales.

Yasunori Shiraishi then spoke for some time on their engine development activities. Of the diesel enginesthey produce, approximately 28% go into their own equipment, with the balance largely exported. Kubota isthe dominant player in the Japanese market. As engine developers, Kubota is keenly aware of the worldwideregulations relating to NOx, HC, CO, and PM. They have adopted a strategy that, while seeming to focus ondeveloping/building engines, simultaneously meets the union of all the tightest regulations. Discussionensued on the independence of the quality audit process to R&D and manufacturing. A graph was showndisplaying the audited performance of most of their engines relative to the California/EPA standards for PMand NOx+HC. The engines complied with the Tier I requirements as well as with the Tier II standards. TheKubota personnel did indicate that for the case of high volume production, stringent adherence tomanufacturing tolerances would be required to meet design intent.

An analogy was made between competitiveness and power density. Under such an analogy, noise, vibration,exhaust gases, and waste heat are indicators of inefficiency and endanger competitiveness. This philosophy


provides some feeling for Kubota’s desire to obtain larger engine displacements on essentially the same basicplatform. To illustrate this point, Mr. Shiraishi discussed the conversion of their 2.2 liter engine to 2.4 liters.Increasing the bore diameter on the 2.2 liter engine would normally result in thin 8 mm wall sections betweenthe bores leading to excessively high temperatures. In order to reduce the temperature, a water passage hasbeen introduced between the bores, producing wall thicknesses in several locations of 3 mm. A stainlesssteel insert is being used for support of the water jacket core.

Mr. Morimoto described Kubota’s environment improvement efforts related to casting. Specifically he citedtwo changes that were implemented two years ago when an old cylinder block and head casting line wasremodeled. One of the changes was to replace gas dryers with microwave dryers in drying core coatings.Not only did this change reduce the cycle time (to 6.5 minutes) by a significant amount, but it also cost two-thirds as much and dramatically lowered CO2 production. A self-annealing process was also discussed,where the heat in the casting immediately after shakeout is used for self-annealing as opposed to allowing thecasting to cool and subsequently heat-treat it. For self-annealing, several hot castings are placed into aninsulated box for approximately 8 hours. The self-annealing process resulted in a significant cycle timereduction (from about 72 hours to 8 hours), less plant space taken, and a tremendous drop in energy usage.The total cycle time for the new environmentally friendly casting line is 17.7 hours as compared to the oldtime of 132 hours.


Site: Mechanical Engineering Laboratory (MEL)Ministry of International Trade and Industry (MITI)1-2 Namiki, TsukubaIbaraki, 305-8564JapanURL: http://www.mel.go.jp


WTEC Attendees: C. Murphy (report author), D. Bauer, B. Bras, T. Gutowski, R. Horning, T. Piwonka,P. Sheng, J. Sutherland, F. Thompson, D. Thurston, E. Wolff

Hosts: Naotake Ooyama, Director-GeneralTakayoshi Ohmi, International Research Cooperation OfficerKeijiro Masui, Manufacturing Machinery DivisionMitsuro Hattori, Director, Machining Process Division, Manufacturing Systems

DepartmentToshio Sano, Director, Manufacturing System DepartmentSatoshi Imamura, Director, Computational Engineering Division, Department of

Applied PhysicsKazuo Mori, Director, Manufacturing Information Division, Manufacturing Systems

DepartmentNozomu Mishima, Senior Researcher, Manufacturing Machinery DivisionKohmei Halada, Team Leader, Ecomaterials Research Team, National Research

Institute for MetalsKazutoshi Tanabe, Chief Senior Researcher, National Institute of Materials and

Chemical ResearchOsamu Kitao, National Institute of Materials and Chemical ResearchAtsushi Inaba, National Institute for Resources and EnvironmentNorihiro Itsubo, LCA Development Division, Japan Environmental Management

Association for Industry (http://www.jemai.or.jp)Toshijiro Ohashi, Chief Researcher, Production Engineering Research Laboratory,

Hitachi, Ltd.

BACKGROUND

The Mechanical Engineering Laboratory (MEL), originally known as the Government MechanicalLaboratory, was founded in 1937. Its original aim was to reduce Japanese dependency on foreigntechnology. Current research at MEL covers seven main areas: materials science and technology;bioengineering; information and systems science; advanced machine technology; energy technology;manufacturing technology; and robotics. MEL and associated government agencies have a number ofprojects related to environmentally benign manufacturing, most notably in the areas of machining, materialselection and processing, and LCA software development.

LAB TOURS

Satoshi Imamura

Design for Product Evolution/ Product (Dis)assembly Optimization

Mr. Imamura discussed the software being developed by his group. The purpose of the software is to allowdesigners to account for product evolution and evolving products for environmental changes. Targetproducts are plant equipment, big machines, manufacturing systems, boilers, elevators, etc. The issues thatthe design tool is meant to address are deterioration and failures and mismatches between product functions


and requirements. The idea is to develop concepts for system design that are easy to service and that areupgradable as performance requirements change and overall component technology improves.

Assembly/disassembly software generates 2- and 3-dimensional assembly/disassembly sequencing for initialassembly, component service, and end-of-life disassembly. There are three approaches: (1) to reconfigure forfixed structured systems; (2) to reconfigure for unfixed structured systems; and (3) to use CAD for productevolution through component reuse. Fixed structured systems are optimized for decreased number of partexchanges and decreased costs (parts and engineering). Unfixed structured systems are optimized usinggeneral algorithms and a design language with dynamic data structure modification. CAD optimization isdone using a database containing historical design and reliability (reverse engineering) data for existingproducts. A brief demonstration of software was given.

Kazuo Mori

Tool Wear Monitoring Using Integrated Sensors

The goal is develop more effective in-process monitoring techniques for tooling processes by usingknowledge-based control and a real-time expert system. Sensor technology is key to achieving this. In onemethod, a simple laser displacement sensor is used to monitor tool wear by detecting wear on the bit.Although compressed air is used to remove fluid, which might obstruct measurements, there is still enoughdetritus and lubricant to disturb the laser. Since the disturbance is random, it can be factored out using aseries of histograms to represent the distance from the laser corresponding to points along the tool. A secondmethod uses an electronic sensor made using a simple resistor of CVD TiN on ceramic. The resistors openthrough the same wear mechanism as the tool. This resistor is calibrated (by controlling the metal filmthickness to about 20 µm) to open at the point when the maximum desired amount of wear on the tool hasoccurred.

Nozomu Mishima

Micro-Factory

This project is investigating reduction in the size of machine tools. The “micro-factory” includes a lathe, amachine mill, a manipulator, etc. The goal appears to be reduction in factory size in order to reduce theenvironmental load related to factory facilitization (e.g., construction, heating and cooling, etc.). It wasunclear whether the relative amount of energy use by these micro-machines was actually less than traditionalsystems.

WORKSHOP PRESENTATIONS

The workshop was designed to bring together representatives from MEL and other government and industryresearch organizations. The NSF/WTEC panelists each gave brief presentations of their research interests.This was followed by presentations from invited researchers. These are described below.

Toshio Sano

International Committee on Environment and Manufacturing (ICEM)

A brief overview of the International Committee on Environment and Manufacturing (ICEM) was presentedand two handouts were distributed: “ICEM in Retrospect” and “Ideas for the Development of the ICEM.”This non-profit organization was formed in 1993. They have held annual workshops with participation byMITI and universities from nine countries including Japan, Germany, and the Netherlands. Their Web site ishttp://www.mel.go.jp/soshiki/seisan/bucyo/icemwebsite.

A brief technical presentation was made on the ecological benefits of magnesium and its alloys. Among thebenefits mentioned were the ability to form lightweight structural materials, ease of recycling, high thermal


conductivity, good EM shielding, and high stiffness. The lowest eco-indicators and energy consumption arefor machining and atomizing (vs. casting).

Mitsuro Hattori

Emission-Free Manufacturing

The environmental burden of the manufacturing process is a critical portion in the life cycle of a product.The long-term goal of this project is to identify technologies for emission-free manufacturing. One means ofachieving this is by reducing the amount of oil-based lubricants in the machining process with a move towater-based lubricants and eventually to dry machining. Downsizing of products is seen as another means tominimizing oil usage. A third technique for decreasing emissions related to oil (or other lubricants) is near-net-shape and net-shape forging. By forming the product very close to its final shape (vs. the conventionaltechnique of pre-forming, rough machining, and final machining) the total amount of machining required issignificantly reduced along with the amount of lubricant used. In addition, material waste volumes and totalenergy consumption (including that used for air conditioning the production area) are also diminished.

Kohmei Halada

Recent Development of Ecomaterials in Japan

A presentation on the merits of “ecomaterials” was given. Two publications were handed out: “Progress ofEcomaterials Research towards Sustainable Society” and “Barrier-Free Processing to Improve Resource-Efficiency through Life Cycle of Material.” In addition, a copy of the presentation and a brochure for TheFourth International Conference on Ecomaterials were provided.

Ecomaterials

One of the key tenets of ecomaterials is to control material properties by structure rather than by elementaladditives (e.g., Cu, Ni, etc., in steel), because in the recycling process these additives become impurities. Inaddition, at the final disposal step, additives and impurities may create a hazardous waste problem.“Ecomaterials” is a subject of VAMAS (Versailles Project on Advanced Materials and Standards) as an inter-government pre-standardization collaboration.

In general, three categories of materials were addressed, each with different issues.

• Diffusive materials are materials of mass consumption and wide distribution. Areas where substitutematerials are being investigated include Pb-based solder, asbestos, PVC, and fire retardant systems forplastics.

• Bulky materials are materials for structural use with mass-production. There are two major thrust areasunder this category. The first are materials that improve the environmental profiles during processing.These include materials from nature (e.g., wood- or soil-based ceramics), from waste (e.g., cement frommunicipal waste or ash), those with multiple-potential, and materials processed with low emissions andenergy consumption materials. The second group of materials are those which are selected for theirimproved recycling potential such as alloys (e.g., steels with fewer elements) and plastics/compositesthat are designed to be recycled.

• Energy-transmission materials are materials for power generation and transmission. Ecomaterials in thiscategory include those with higher performance and/or longer life in the use stage (e.g., greater strengthand heat resistance), and those which reduce the amount of energy required such as light-weight alloysfor vehicles.

Barrier-Free Processing of Materials

The primary goal of this area of research is to keep materials in use for as long as possible before ultimatedisposal. Three themes are focused upon:


• Material selection (use recycled materials and materials that can be easily recycled)

• Design for X (include environmental factors in determining function and process parameters)

• Materials efficiency accounting (measure and model effects of material selection on environmentalfactors)

STA (Science Technology Agency, Japan Government) has launched a five-year research project on“Barrier-free Processing” with funding of about Yen 300 million per year, beginning in 1999, following theresearch project on “Ecomaterials” from 1993 to 1997.

Kazutoshi Tanabe

Discrimination of Plastics Wastes by Combining Near-Infrared Spectra Measurement and Neural NetworkAnalysis

A method for rapid discrimination of plastic wastes for recycling was presented. A portablespectrophotometer weighing less than 2 Kg was used to measure 300 samples of 51 different kinds ofplastics. Normalized, second-derivative, near-infrared spectral data in the 1.3 to 2.3 µm wavelength regionwere trained in a three-layer (input, intermediate, and output) perceptron-type neural network. The averagediscrimination (“hit-rate”) was 77%. The method performed best on low-end plastics such as PET.Engineered plastics had the poorest discrimination rates (38% for ABS and 60% for PC/ABS). The methoddoes not work on densely colored or black plastics.

Osamu Kitao

Materials Engineering towards Green Chemistry

The background of the U.S. EPA’s Green Chemistry program was reviewed. This was followed by atimeline showing the history of similar programs supported by the Japanese government. A reference listwas also provided.

Atsushi Inaba

Current Activities of Energy Analysis Division, NIRE

NIRE’s LCA software package was described. This software is distributed free of charge to both industryand universities with approximately 250 received by the former and 40 by the latter. The software was usedto evaluate CO2 emissions for three different power station construction options and the results werepresented.

A general discussion of LCA followed with the suggestion that three key areas of analyses were needed inorder to make LCA a truly valuable tool. These were cost, social (industry commitments), and timefunctions.

Norihiro Itsubo

Development of Assessment Technology of Life-Cycle Environmental Impacts of Products

The project was started in 1998, is scheduled to last five years, and has an overall budget of ¥850 million(~$8.5M). The project is designed to develop a highly reliable LCA database and LCA methodology andconsists of three committees covering inventory, database, and impact assessment. The results of the projectare intended to be applied to:

• Popularization of eco-design and construction of eco-processes within industry

• Approval of eco-labeling

• Establishment of environmental specifications

• Green purchasing


• Dealing with COP3 Protocol (see http://www.cop3.de/)

• Textbooks for education and reliable LCA software

• Training of LCA experts

One of the most significant challenges will be to develop a usable material database. Twenty-three industryassociations are participating in the Inventory Study Committee with representatives from seven stages alongthe life cycle (resources and energy, materials, parts, products, uses, recycling, and waste). Both realmaterial flow data and statistically derived data will be included, and the data format will be in accordancewith ISO 14040 and 14041.

The primary goal of the Impact Assessment Study Committee will be to establish damage functions, whichlink environmental impacts to specific damages. Damage is categorized by whether the impact is on HumanHealth, Ecosystems, or Resource Depletion. These are then weighted to give a final single indicator or index.There was significant discussion between the panelists and Dr. Itsubo regarding the use of a single index.

FINAL DISCUSSION

Key Contributors

Halada, Ohashi, Kitao, Inaba, Itsubo

Background

Industrial environmental activities have greatly increased in the last three years. This is evidenced by theincrease in environmental reports generated by companies, by widespread ISO 14000 certification, and anintensive national effort to increase the use of LCA. The general trend in government is towards smaller,leaner groups. This has an impact on the ability of agencies such as MEL to pursue environmentalinvestigations at an optimal level. The consensus seemed to be that there was still a significant amount ofwork to be done, especially in the area of public education, and that the effort would require internationalleadership.

Industrial Perspective

Environmental evaluation priorities from an industrial perspective are two-fold. The first is characterizationof environmental impact; the second is integration of economic and environmental factors. In order to meetboth of these objectives, the primary need is the development of methodologies for measurement,documentation, and prioritization among environmental and other goals. It was noted that companies oftendo not see material and energy savings as cost savings, and cost is the key driving factor for industrialdecisions.

Technical Perspective

There was a discussion regarding the effectiveness of technology transfer between MITI and industry. It wasfelt by some of the representatives that it was working well in the area of LCA (see notes from presentationsby Inaba and Itsubo above). Development of environmental evaluation tools to support conceptual (earlystage) design of products and materials is seen as the critical area for technological advancement. The twoareas for which the most technical information and methodologies have been developed appear to be energyconsumption and CO2 emissions. This is in large part due to direct economic benefits and ease ofmeasurement and accounting for these factors.

LCA Challenges

The consensus was that LCA is not currently being used as a viable, technical, decision-making tool butrather as a marketing tool or as propaganda (by both government and industry). There was strong agreementthat the most difficult challenge in implementing LCA impact assessment will be integration of the scientificmethod with judgmental decisions. There was a significant amount of discussion surrounding what


dimensionality of indices is appropriate (i.e., single vs. multiple) and who can and/or should make the valuejudgements.

National Leadership Challenges

The researchers felt that it was important for the Japanese government to continue its support of industry inmeeting environmental goals. Some concern was expressed, however, that the level of governmentinvestment in this research area is diminishing. There was a feeling that international leadership would berequired in order to help establish environmental priorities. Japan operates in a much more globalenvironment than the United States and must respond to these types of leadership initiatives. There are alsostrong economic incentives to do so. Both within Japan and internationally, there is a tendency for industryto benchmark against neighbors (close competitors). This will facilitate the effectiveness of goals set by bothnational and international leaders.

REFERENCES

Mori, K. “Tool Wear Monitoring Using Integrated Sensors”

Kasashima, N., K. Mori, G. Herrera Ruiz, and N. Taniguchi. 1995. Online failure detection in face milling using discretewavelet transform. Annals of the CIRP (44), 483-487.

Mori, K., N. Kasashima, T. Yoshioka, and Y. Ueno. 1996. Prediction of spalling on a ball bearing by applying thediscrete wavelet transform to vibration signals. WEAR 195 (1996). 162-168.


Site: Nagoya UniversityDepartment of Mechanical EngineeringFuro-cho, Chikusa-ku,Nagoya, 464-8603Japan


WTEC Attendees: P. Sheng (report author), D. Bauer, B. Bras, T. Gutowski, C. Murphy, T. Piwonka,J. Sutherland, F. Thompson, D. Thurston, E. Wolff

Hosts: Katsumi Yamaguchi, Nagoya UniversityTomio Matsubara, Nagoya Institute of TechnologyHideo Sekiguchi, Nara National College of Technology

BACKGROUND

Environmentally benign manufacturing research is a relatively new area of focus for Kansai area universities.However, some initial steps have been taken in terms of creating a network of interested researchers andpossible research directions.

Organizationally, the International Committee on Manufacturing for the Japan Society for Technology ofPlasticity (JSTP) has recently formed a working group focused on environmental issues. The Japan Societyfor Precision Engineering (JSPE) has formed a committee to study EBM applications in metal cutting.Finally, the International Committee on Environment and Manufacturing (ICEM) has had strong Japaneseparticipation through its past and present directorship (Prof. Kimura of the University of Tokyo and Dr. Sanoof MITI, respectively).

MICROFABRICATION RESEARCH AT NAGOYA UNIVERSITY

Prof. Yamaguchi has a main research focus in the area of microfabrication. The general linkage withenvironment is a reduction in energy and material consumption through miniaturization and elimination ofchemical agents. In particular, three research projects were described:

• 3-D rapid prototyping through microjet metal deposition. Solder droplets are ejected through a piezo-electric nozzle to solidify on a target surface. By repeated scanning of the nozzle over the surface, a 3-Dstructure can be built up in layers. Prototype structures shown consisted of pyramidal structures built upfrom nickel (250 micron diameter drops formed at 1060ºF) and gold (75 micron diameter drops formedat 1400ºF). This leads to a reduction in environmental pollution by eliminating plating and etching.

• Microfabrication through UV laser photopolymerization. Scale down the stereolithography process toinvestigate forming micro-scale components through selective UV curing using conventionalphotopolymers. Sample structures showed dimensions of approximately 500 microns in dimension withfeature sizes down to order of 10 microns.

• Grinding wheel design using embedded microfibers. SiC whiskers (1 micron diameter by 50 micronslong) are embedded radially in an epoxy matrix to form a grinding wheel. Due to the identical whiskers,higher precision ground surfaces can be produced. Grinding is performed in a light load, high-speedcondition. Currently testing the feasibility of diamond whiskers.

SEMI-DRY CUTTING RESEARCH AT THE NAGOYA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY

Prof. Matsubara has been conducting a project focusing on environmentally benign machining through semi-dry cutting. This is accomplished through a new nozzle design, which incorporates a mixing chamber andaerosol nozzle. Water enters the mixing chamber at three liters per minute, while vegetable oil is fed in at 3


ml per minute. Upon nozzle exit, water breaks up into droplets, which become nucleus sites for oil coating.Vegetable oil is used due to its bio-degradable disposal characteristics; however, it is used only once anddisposed (e.g., no reuse of oil occurs).

This process has been successfully tested for turning, milling, and grinding operations, and results in lowermachining temperatures (by approximately 30-40°C). Prof. Matsubara hypothesizes that there may also beadvantages in terms of surface finish achievable, but this needs to be tested.


Site: National Institute for Resources and Environment (NIRE)16-3, Onogawa, TsukubaIbaraki, 305-8569JapanURL: http://www.nire.go.jp

Date Visited: October 18, 1999

WTEC Attendees: T. Gutowski (report author), D. Bauer, B. Bras, R. Horning, C. Murphy, T. Piwonka,P. Sheng, J. Sutherland, F. Thompson, D. Thurston, E. Wolff

Hosts: Mikio Kobayashi, Head, Rare Metals Division, Materials Processing DepartmentYoichi Kodera, Senior Researcher, Hydrocarbon Research Division, Energy Resources

DepartmentKeiji Handa, Head, International Cooperation Office

Other Attendees: Dr. Naotake Ooyama, Director-General, Mechanical Engineering Laboratory, AIST,MITI

Dr. Eng. Kohmei Halada, Team Leader (Ecomaterials Research Team),National Research Institute for Metals

Mr. Takayoshi Ohmi, International Research Cooperation Officer,Mechanical Engineering Laboratory, AIST, MITI

Prof. Dr. Toshio Sano, Director, Manufacturing Systems Department, MechanicalEngineering Lab., AIST, MITI

Dr. Mitsuro Hattori, Director, Machining Process Division, Manufacturing SystemsDepartment, Mechanical Engineering Laboratory, AIST, MITI

Dr. Eng. Akira Sato, Director of Frontier Research Center for Structural Materials,National Research Institute of Metals, Science and Technology Agency

BACKGROUND

The panel visit started with an overview of operations at NIRE. NIRE is one of 15 institutes under theAgency of Industrial Science and Technology (AIST) which is under the Ministry of International Trade andIndustry (MITI). NIRE is composed of nine departments:

• Global Warming Control Dept.

• Thermal Energy and Combustion Engineering Dept.

• Atmospheric Environmental Protection Dept.

• Hydrospheric Environmental Protection Dept.

• Environmental Assessment Dept.

• Energy Resources Dept.

• Materials Processing Dept.

• Geotechnology Dept.

• Safety Engineering Dept.

In 1999 they had 226 researchers, with an annual budget (including salaries) of ¥5 billion. There is no cashflow with industry, but in some cases equipment and space are provided by industry. Panelists receivedoverviews of research projects in two areas: soft metallurgy and plastics recycling.


EBM ACTIVITIES

Soft metallurgy was described as the environment friendly processing of metals, often at lower temperaturesor on site. Under this category several projects were described for the recovery of rare metals fromprocessing. For example, a low temperature process for the extraction of Cu from CuFeS2 was presented.The current technique is energy intensive, using a flash furnace, and releases SOx. The proposed chlorinationprocess, though quite complex, operates at 400ºC, which reduces energy, produces elemental sulfur and noslag. Details on energy saved or pollutants reduced were not given. The second soft metallurgy project wasfocused on the recovery of zinc from electric arc furnace gases by filtering and then condensation on ceramicpowders. The method has advantages because it is simple, reduces energy and can recover Zn on site. Athird project, which was briefly described, focused on the recovery of nickel and copper from surface platingby using solvent extractants.

The second major area, which was discussed at NIRE, was the recycling of plastics. The panel saw a projecton the recovery of phenol, from both phenolic and epoxy resins by liquid phase decomposition. Thisresearch is based on the use of a hydrogen donating solvent such as tetralin and moderate temperatures(400ºC) to recover phenols from thermoset plastics. This route allows recovery of phenols at an efficiency ofabout 60 to 80% by weight directly from factory waste. This compares very favorably with current recoveryscenarios based on pyrolysis and super critical water which can only give efficiencies of about 20% due tothe recombination of radicals. Currently there is a small prototype facility built for this project that is beingevaluated. Interest in this work has led to a joint research project with Sumitomo Bakelite, Hitachi Chemicaland JVC to start next year. Work continues to look for a tetralin substitute. A photo of Dr. Yoichi Kodera infront of his liquid phase decomposition laboratory set-up is shown below (Figure D.1).

Fig. D.1. Dr. Yoichi Kodera in front of his liquid phase decomposition laboratory set-up.


Site: NEC CorporationResources and Environment Protection Research Laboratories1-1, Miyazaki 4-Chome, Miyamae-kuKawasaki, Kanagawa, 216-8555Japan


WTEC attendees: B. Bras (report author), H. Morishita, D. Thurston, E. Wolff

Hosts: Mr. Sjunji Kishida, General Manager, Resources & Environment Protection ResearchLaboratories

Mr. Koichi Sohara, Senior Manager, Overseas Support, Environmental ManagementDivision

INTRODUCTION

Mr. Kishida has been in the environmental area for the past three years. Mr. Sohara regularly visits NECsubsidiaries overseas, including those in the U.S.

EBM ACTIVITIES

NEC started to work on environmental issues over 25 years ago, and the laboratory will have its 26thanniversary this year. The environmental work started on pollution in waste water. Since then, the focus haschanged many times. (A good overview of the history of NEC’s environmental activities is presented in NEC1999a, where there is also a good overview of key events in Japanese environmental activities.)

Both Mr. Kishida and Mr. Sohara see U.S. companies as not having good environmental attitudes. They seeEurope as the leader, Japan as second, and the U.S. last in the environmental arena. However, a recentEuropean investigation sees Japanese companies becoming first in the area.

Environmental activities are mainly handled at NEC Headquarters. Environmental auditing started in 1973(NEC 1999a). In 1991, NEC’s environmental charter was enacted. The charter can be found in (NEC 1999a,p. 49).

Motivation and Financial Issues

Mr. Kishida stated that the original motivation came from NEC’s president Koji Kobayashi who decided thatthis was an area that NEC should pay attention to.

More recently, Mr. Kishida noted, there has been a significant interest in the EcoFund. This is a mutual fundwith companies who are considered to be leaders in the environmental field. This fund has become morepopular recently, and in the last 2-3 years, the stock of EcoFund companies has outperformed others.

Another driver is the green purchasing network and power. Mr. Kishida cited a case in which Ericssonrecently cancelled a large order from a large American PC company due to environmental issues. Accordingthe Mr. Kishida, this is a well-known example in the computer industry and made quite an impact.

The financial advantage of NEC’s environmental activities is not clear. This year, NEC has adoptedenvironmental accounting and will keep track of financial savings. Many of NEC’s environmental activitieswere self-motivated and seen as a social responsibility. It was explained that the Japanese top managementconsiders reputation to be very important.

Mr. Kishida believes that, in the near future, financial benefits will come from the stock market. Return oninvestment calculations (called environmental accounting, see NEC 1999a, p. 36) have just started.


Currently, these efforts are focused on waste management targets (NEC 1999a, p. 8). Phase I started in 1985,now NEC is in Phase III of waste management.

Targets

Targets are set in the Corporate Environmental Plan. The main issue for each division is to developenvironmentally conscious products. Negotiations with designers and engineers occur as well about thetargets. Feasibility is discussed first. Targeting occurs after many discussions, and reasonable targets willemerge.

The targets listed in (NEC 1999a, p. 8) are for the domestic (Japanese) market. For oversea subsidiaries“rougher” guidelines are set based on cultural differences.

There is an environmental organization in each division and a general R&D group. All meet twice a year todiscuss current issues. Many needs are identified during the discussions.

New Technology

Very safe flame-retardant plastics with both halogen and phosphorus free have been developed as follows:

• NuCycle plastic, supplied by Sumitomo DOW. This is a recylcable housing poly-carbonate material withsilicone-based flame retardant (see NEC 1999a, p. 15).

• New IC molding resin without any harmful flame retardant, to be supplied by Sumitomo Bakelite (NEC1999a, p. 20).

• Improved printed circuit boards (PCBs) are the next targets.

Many themes are currently under development. Prioritization is based on how long certain needs haveexisted.

Life-Cycle Assessment

NEC has also developed its own LCA software that satisfies ISO 14040. A key motivator for in-housesoftware tool development (rather than using other commercially available tools) is the problem oftranslating software into the Japanese language. However, now NEC is faced with the challenge oftranslating their software for English speaking countries and subsidiaries, according to Mr. Sohara. Opennessof tools is also a big issue, and a stumbling block in using currently available tools. NEC has incorporated theuse of distributed access over the internet in its LCA software and database.

Examples were shown of new computer improvements that have been made in terms of energy, CO2, etc.reductions. Another example shown is an LCA for a internet provider type information system (centralserver, hub, clients, etc.) with data for one year. Recently the focus is on corporate LCA, i.e., assessing theenvironmental load of the entire corporation, rather than specific products.

It was shown that NEC contributes 0.45 million tons of carbon annually, equaling 0.1% of the total Japaneseemissions. NEC’s sales are 1% of Japan’s GDP. Supplier emissions are estimated at 0.94 million tons carbon(0.3% of Japanese emissions). User emissions are estimated at 0.3 million tons carbon (equal to 0.07% ofJapan’s emissions). The supplier number includes mining, material, and component manufacture. NECmakes some in-house components like semiconductors. Many other parts are bought and assembled, so theenvironmental impact of NEC itself is relatively low from a manufacturing perspective.

An efficiency index calculation was shown. The efficiency index is calculated as net sales divided by theresource and energy consumption throughout the life cycle. A sample calculation was shown, indicating thatNEC’s efficiency index is 3,737,000 million yen (domestic)—which, when divided by (0.94 + 0.45 + 0.30)million tons of carbon, results in an efficiency of about 2200 yen per kilogram carbon.

Software has also been developed for assessing human toxicity potential. The idea came from Europe. TheNEC software will be commercially available soon.


Product Design

Key product concepts that are being pursued are:

• Modifiability (longer usage)

• Simplicity (greater recyclability)

• Use-flexibility (attractiveness for usage)

The “Eco-PC” was shown as an example. It is based on a modular concept, and each component has a singlefunction. It is currently a laboratory prototype only.

The “SHARE” concept combines a computer and audiovisual entertainment system in 12 functional units(down from 32 separate and overlapping units and components). Each unit can be combined with other unitsto form whatever system is needed (e.g., a PC, TV system). For example, the monitor can also serve as a TVmonitor and the speakers also connect to the computer.

Collaboration

Some collaboration exists with domestic universities regarding eco-design and new business styles (as ininverse manufacturing, e.g., with Prof. Kimura, University of Tokyo). NEC believes that reuse and a loopingbusiness economy will reduce the environmental load significantly.

Not much cooperation exists with other companies. There are no trade organizations for exchange ofinformation. However, Mr. Kishida is personally interested in creating a network.

IN CLOSING

Mr. Kishida seeks to focus more on the corporate level impact and believes that economic gain andenvironmental excellence can go hand in hand. He wants to help NEC achieve this.

NEC activities in EBM from a production point of view are listed in (NEC 1999a, p. 5). Relevant evaluationis done by Mr. Kishida’s group. Mr. Kishida feels that the goals are not satisfactory yet.

Both Mr. Kishida and Mr. Sohara voiced strong concerns about the lack of environmental activities and theamount of resource usage of the United States.

REFERENCES

NEC. 1999a. Ecology—A Key Part of NEC Technology. NEC Annual Environmental Report. Also available athttp://www.nec.co.jp/english/kan/index.html.

NEC. 1999b. A New NEC for the Next Century. Annual Report, NEC Corporation.

NEC. Nd. “Research and Development,” NEC, NSN 1079 Ver.3.


Site: Nippon Steel Corporation (NSC)Nippon Steel Building2-6-3 Otemachi, Chiyoda-kuTokyo, 100-8071Japan


WTEC Attendees: D. Bauer (report author), T. Piwonka, J. Sutherland, F. Thompson

Hosts: Nobuhiko Takamatsu, Senior Manager, Technical Administration & PlanningTeruo Okazaki, Senior Manager, Global Environmental Affairs

BACKGROUND

Nippon Steel produces about 25% of Japan’s steel, and Japan produces about 13% of global steel production(second after China). The steel industry accounts for 11% of total energy consumption in Japan. Seventy-eight percent of the energy consumed is coal. The use of petroleum in steel production decreased during theoil crisis of the early 1970s.

EBM ACTIVITIES

The (1967) Basic Law for Environmental Pollution Control and the 14 Environmental Laws of 1970 (AirPollution, Water Pollution, etc.) resulted in increased industry investment in environmental measures in theearly to mid 1970s. Most of the focus for this investment was in improved equipment energy efficiencies andend-of-pipe mitigative technologies.

Motivation for Environmental Activities

Municipal Air Emission Regulation/ Public Accountability

Since the 1970s, municipalities have developed agreements with local manufacturers, such as NSC, to reduceemissions to an agreed-upon level, commonly for NOx and SOx (also COD, benzene, PM, CO2). Both thegovernment and Nippon Steel monitor emissions for these municipal agreements. Attaining these valuesmay be more costly for NSC, so there may be some incentive to shift production to areas where requirementsare less stringent. The tradeoff is somewhat complicated, however, as highly regulated areas are likely to beurban centers, and thus, lower attainment costs in outlying areas may be offset by higher transportation costsfor finished materials.

Whether or not there is a municipal agreement, companies still must publicly report their NOx, SOx, COD,benzene, PM, and CO2 emissions.

COP 3/ Keidanren Voluntary Action Plan

The three elements of the “Kyoto mechanism,” COP 3, are emissions reduction, technology transfer, andtechnology development. In response to the Kyoto Agreement, industrial sectors in Japan came to their ownagreement in 1997, called the Keidanren Voluntary Action Plan. The steel industry’s program (as led by theIron and Steel Federation – JISF) under the plan has the following key points:

• Energy-saving efforts in steel-making

• Effective utilization of waste plastics

• Distribution of unused energy to surrounding areas

• Contribution to energy-saving society, with steel products and by-products

• Contribution to energy savings through technical assistance


Avoiding CO2 was said to be the most important environmental problem in steel production.

Uses for Process Waste

Blast furnace slag is mainly used for cement and roadbed materials. Steel-making slag and dust sludge areused for other construction applications.

Technical Innovations and Challenges

Coal is especially important—beyond its use as an energy source—for its use as a reducing agent for ferrousoxide. If carbon (such as found in coal) is used as a reducing agent, this means that there will always besignificant CO2 emissions. Increasing the use of hydrogen as a reducing agent is a possibility—but it isexpensive. One means for doing this, partially inspired by the coming April 2000 recycling law, is to useplastic (C+H). This is a process that is in development. There are a few challenges, such as removingchlorine and other potentially toxic emissions from the process, either through pre-process plastic sorting orthrough end-of-pipe means. Also, developing the logistics for sorting, collecting, and transporting post-consumer plastic to steel plants is quite challenging; the aim is to use an ambitious 11% of total Japaneseplastic waste.

The Japanese auto industry uses relatively high quantities of steel (similar cars are lighter, but the percentageof steel is higher). Pressures toward further reducing auto weight/ increasing fuel efficiency may mean lowerquantities of higher quality steel in cars, which in turn will mean less business for NSC, but otherapplications for steel (such as pipes) are being exploited. Current technical challenges in the development ofautomotive steel with a better performance-to-weight ratio include weldability and formability.

There has been a tradition of energy recovery efforts in the steel industry. Current recovery efforts involvethe more challenging lower temperature (150-200°C) heat sources.

Collaboration with Customers and Other Researchers

A new trend is for customers to request a steel formulation with a certain type of environmental performance,such as no chrome plating. NSC works with customers on such requests.

Large companies, such as NSC, currently complete research projects, mainly on their own, but NSC aspiresto change this. They are trying to develop better relationships with NRIM and with universities.

REFERENCES

Japanese Iron & Steel Industry and its environmental conservation efforts – An example of Nippon Steel Corporation.(Draft version – to be published by the World Bank.)

Asamura, T. 1997. Eco-processes, eco-materials, and eco-systems in the steel-making industry. Ecomaterials Forum.

Nippon Steel Corp. 1998. Nippon Steel Environmental Report.

Environmental control measures in Nippon Steel Corporation (1 page diagram).


Site: New Earth Conference and Exhibition, Osaka, Japan


WTEC Attendees E. Wolff (report author), B. Bras

OBSERVATIONS

It became obvious that most companies visited by the panel had been actively engaged in environmentalactivities for a number of years. The principal driver for such actions had been the high cost of wastedisposal and, in more recent years, the severity of air and water pollution.

Already known for their efficient manufacturing processes, Japanese companies have adopted policies callingfor stringent conservation in materials and energy utilization. The environmental policies of Fuji Xerox,NEC, Hitachi, etc., have turned compliance with and adherence to ISO 14000 into operational requirements.Greater effort is required through annual improvement targets in each of these companies, with the ultimategoal of zero waste.

Additionally, such manufacturers as Nippon Steel, Hitachi Heavy Equipment, and Kubota Tractor haveentered into new markets in environmental remediation. This was well demonstrated during the Osaka NewEarth Conference and Exhibition, which acted as a showcase to the world. Here, full-scale demonstrationsrevealed the extensive engineering and development activities that resulted in:

• next generation high-temperature incinerators for municipal and industrial waste (by Nippon Steel)

• closed-loop residential and industrial waste and water treatment (by Kubota Tractor)

• mobile construction material separation equipment that processes and segregates all building materialsduring demolition and building rehabilitation phase (by Hitachi)

Hitachi also offers a product that reclaims contaminated soil at a rate of 80 m3 per hour directly on location.The Takuma Company demonstrated a unique circulating fluidized bed boiler for waste and solid fuelcombustion. Energy is provided through a steam-turbine-driven generator and distributed to local utilities.

More than 400 exhibitors presented commercial products that included new energy efficient householdappliances, nighttime energy storage devices for residential and commercial air conditioning, and lowpollution automotive products.

Significant waste reduction has occurred through the reuse of coal ash and waste treatment in buildingmaterials (cement and concrete additives, ceramic tiles), and through recycling plastic materials into furnitureand as a fuel for incinerators.

The energy providing sector had several entries and has seen a 40% reduction in CO2 emissions due to avariety of efforts, including liquefied natural gas, atomic power plants, geothermal, voltaic and wind power.

Clearly, the Japanese industrial base is turning its geographical disadvantages into new opportunities. Bycreating advanced remediation technology, their industries will become leaders in global markets asdeveloping and developed countries strive to manufacture products with minimal impact on the environment.


Site: National Institute of Materials and Chemical Research (NIMC)Agency of Industrial Science and Technology, MITI1-1 Higashi, TsukubaIbaraki, 305-8565Japan


WTEC Attendees: J. Sutherland (report author), D. Bauer, T. Gutowski, R. Horning, C. Murphy,T. Piwonka, P. Sheng

Host: Dr. Masagi Mizuno, International Research Liaison Office

INTRODUCTION

After a brief institute overview by Dr. Mizuno (400 staff) the visitors were escorted to three laboratories:

EBM ACTIVITIES

Biodegradable Polymers (Dr. Kazuo Nakayama)

Several types of biodegradable polymers are being examined, e.g., aliphatic polyesters, PBS (poly butylenesuccinate), PLLA (poly L-lactic acid), PCL (poly hexano-6-lactone). As is, these polymers are somewhatproperty-limited. To counter this effect, the researchers are examining property improvement through processoptimization and the effects of the addition of carbon fibers for reinforcement. It is envisioned that thebiodegradable polymers will be broken down by hydrolysis.

Environmentally Compatible Catalysts (Dr. Yuji Yoshimura)

Dr. Yoshimura spoke on the catalyst work underway at the institute. This includes efforts directed at thecracking of Naptha to produce lower olefins, reducing the energy by a factor of four via a simpler process,and producing ethylene and propylene. They are looking at zeolite modified with a layer of metal oxides forthis process. Catalysts are also being applied for the production of cleaner diesel fuels, e.g., less aromaticsand sulphur, to reduce NOx, CO, HC, and PM. They are also looking at noble metal catalysts, and are tryingto make them more sulphur tolerant. Recent values obtained using their approach are below 10% foraromatics and 50 ppm for sulphur (the current sulphur standard in Japan is 500 ppm).

Near IR Spectroscopy for Plastics Sorting (Dr. Kazutoshi Tanabe)

The above-referenced technique is being used in an effort to identify a wide range of plastics. A number ofsamples have been used as trials for the development of a neural net identification scheme. Thehardware/software setup is believed to be capable of identifying a large number of plastic types. As expected,darkly colored plastic samples present a problem for the scheme. Upon questioning from the visitors, Dr.Tanabe revealed that at present only PET is recycled in Japan, but that by April 2000 all plastics are to berecycled. At the time of the visit 40% of plastics are landfilled, 50% burned (viewed as recycling), and 10%recycled as material. Dr. Tanabe speculated that the landfilled plastics would need to be burned after April2000, lacking any other solution. Efforts are underway to try to identify additives within plastics using thenear IR spectroscopy technique as well.


Site: National Research Institute for Metals (NRIM)Science and Technology Agency1-2-1 Sengen, TsukubaIbaraki, 305-0047Japan


WTEC Attendees: J. Sutherland (report author), D. Bauer, T. Gutowski, R. Horning, C. Murphy,T. Piwonka, P. Sheng

Hosts: Dr. Kohmei Halada, NRIMDr. Koichi Yagi, NRIMDr. Akira Sato, NRIMDr. Halada, Team Leader, EcoMaterials Research TeamDr. Yagi, Supervising Researcher, 2nd Research Group (Advanced Nuclear Materials

Group)Dr. Sato, Director, Frontier Research Center for Structural Materials

DISCUSSION

Dr. Sato gave an overview of the institute. The institute is divided into research groups and centers. Theinstitute has about 400 employees (300 researchers) and a total budget of approximately $120 million. Hethen spoke on the Frontier Research Center for Structural Materials that was established almost three yearsago. Researchers from Nippon Steel and Mitsubishi Heavy Industries are collaborating with centerpersonnel. The center’s mission is “to decrease the environmental load and the total life cost of structuralmaterial by doubling the strength and life of steels.” Four specific project initiatives are being undertaken:

• Development of 800 MPa High Strength Steel

− This initiative is directed at identifying thermomechanical processing conditions that can be used todouble the strength of standard 400 MPa steel. Lightly alloyed steel is the base material of choicebecause of the advantages it offers over more exotically alloyed steels in terms of weldability andrecyclability. The goal of the thermomechanical processes is to produce ultra-fine grain sizes of onemicrometer. Innovation is also being sought in terms of joining processes that are fast and require aminimum amount of heat—to avoid welding defects, minimize residual stresses, and provide highquality joints.

• Development of 1500 MPa Ultra-High Strength Steel

− There is a need for steel with a strength in excess of 1500 MPa for application as bolts in theconstruction industry, lighter automobile parts, and cables in suspension bridges. The issue is not somuch the strength but delaying fracture and achieving giga-cycle fatigue. To develop the steel, thecenter is examining martensitic steels that contain carbon-free boundaries and hydrogen trap sites.Martensitic steels with a large amount of nitrogen are also being studied.

• Development of Advanced Ferritic Steels for Boilers Utilizing Ultra-Supercritical Steam

− The emphasis of this effort is on developing an advanced heat-resistant steel. High Cr ferritic steelsare being studied with attention focused on long-term exposure to high temperatures because ofcoarsening of precipitates and dislocation recovery. Research is focused on stabilizing the temperedmartensitic microstructure.

• Development of Steels Resistant to Marine Corrosion

− This initiative is directed at developing steels that are resistant to weathering and corrosion inmarine and offshore environments. Nanoscopic level studies seek to characterize and removenonmetallic inclusions, because such inclusions trigger rust initiation in low-alloy steels and variousforms of localized corrosion in stainless steels. New refining strategies such as cold-crucibletechniques and electro-slag refining will be examined for these pure steels.


LAB TOURS

In one lab, researcher Nagai described the experimental apparatus used for thermomechanical processing.The machine is capable of heating the specimen and applying a bi-axial load and has achieved some success.The research team is working towards applying their technique to plate processing and scaling up their labsetup to a pilot plant.

In a second laboratory, a new arc welding process setup was described. Basically, the process seeks toreduce the area of the heat-affected zone. The process utilizes a narrow gap of approximately 5 mm and thelocation of the arc is oscillated up and down by varying the current.


Site: Polyvinyl Chloride Industrial AssociationIINO Bldg., 2-1-1 Uchisaiwai-cho, Chiyoda-kuTokyo, 100-0011Japan


WTEC Attendees: T. Gutowski (report author), C. Murphy, P. Sheng

Hosts: Mr. Shinsuke Sasaki, General Manager, Quality Control, Taiyo Vinyl CorporationDr. Tetsuya Makino, Director, Environmental Services, Mitsubishi Chemical MKV

CompanyMr. Hiromi Nii, General Manager, Environmental Div., Vinyl Chloride Dept.,

Mitsubishi Chemical CorporationMr. Takayuki Endo, TokuyamaMr. Shuichi Sasaki, Executive Director, Vinyl Environmental Council

OBSERVATION AND DISCUSSION

The Polyvinyl Chloride Industrial Association includes two groups concerned with environmental issues: theVinyl Environmental Council (VEC), made up of PVC manufacturers—12 companies, both monomer andpolymer manufacturers—and the Japanese PVC Environmental Affairs Council (JPEC), made up of PVCprocessors (including convertors or manufacturers of film, pipe, fittings, wire, cable, and flooring, etc.).VEC is working with ECVM (European Council of Vinyl Manufacturers) and U.S. organizations toexchange information and ideas. We met with representatives and members from both groups who reviewedprogress in PVC recycling, and highlighted the durability of PVC to environmental effects. PVC was toutedas a good candidate for recycling because of its durability, ability to be recycled repeatedly, multipleapplications, and industry standards. For example, we were shown data for side molding on an automobiledoor after 13 years which was shown to have good properties retention in almost all categories. Our guestspointed out that this was flexible PVC and that rigid PVC might have similar results after 50 years. PVC hasbeen shown to be recyclable as many as five times with acceptable properties. Recycled materials tend to beused in lower grade products such as floor tiles and slip-on shoes.

Panelists then received an overview of recycling scenarios for PVC. These included: (1) grinding andreprocessing of similar grades for use in various applications, including pipe, agricultural films, and windowsashes; (2) reduction of PVC to feed stock monomer; (3) use of PVC as a reducing agent for a blast furnace(there is a project with NKK to produce 5,000 tons per year to be finished February 2000, and there arecontinuing experiments to expand the target to 8,000 tons per year to treat many kinds of applications); (4)the use of PVC in cement (with a pilot plant to produce 500 tons per year, completed this year); and (5) agasification process for retrieving CO2, H2 and HCl as chemical raw materials, currently in the study stage,using no pre-dehydrochlorination and returning the PVC to its monomer state.

Two interesting PVC recycling projects were discussed in some detail. One was the recycling of PVC pipeback into pipe. Thirty-five percent of all pipe was recycled in 1997 and the goal is to have 70% recycled in2000. By August, 1999, there were 12 recycling centers established throughout Japan with financialcooperation from VEC. Early in 2001, the number will be expanded to 18, with 50 or more intermediatecollection centers being built per prefecture. The biggest challenges will be the expansion of recovery routesand development of new applications. JPEC has established a separate specification for recycled pipes toaccount for the diminished physical properties of recycled PVC (i.e., reduction in molecular weight, whichreduces the strength). The application is limited to non-pressurized drain pipes. However, the specs aremore than adequate for this application. There are four companies making pipe using recycled PVC, withone of the keys to success being the use of a good extruder.

Recycled pipe currently costs more than virgin pipe. This cost increase is offset by a subsidy from theMinistry of Construction (which is administered by municipal governments) and by a mandatory “clean-up


fee” for property owners at construction sites. The clean-up includes sortation and recycling of allconstruction waste for both demolition and new construction. This recovery operation must be performed bya licensed individual trained to properly identify and sort materials.

The second interesting application we saw was a window sash for double pane windows. The sash consistsof recycled PVC sandwiched between virgin PVC and PMMA. The virgin PVC provides an attractive whitesurface that shows on the interior of the house, and the PMMA is colored to match the exterior trim. The70% of the resulting product that is composed of recycled PVC is hidden by these outer coatings. Thesuccess of this project required an innovative 3-materials extrusion process, based upon a 2-materials co-extrusion process developed by the Germans. The 3-materials extrusion process developed by the Japaneseis being patented by Tokuyama, with plans to license the technology to other sash producers. Thisapplication enjoys the benefits of both having the recycled PVC material cost subsidized by the governmentand providing reduced energy loss from buildings. Hence the PVC sash is quickly replacing the morecommon aluminum sash, which is currently used in 90% of all windows in Japan.

Fig. D.2. PVC sash consisting of recycled PVC sandwiched between virgin PVC and PMMA.


Site: Sony CorporationCore Technology & Network CompanyGate City Osaki West Tower1-11-1 Osaki Shinagawa-kuTokyo, 141-0032JapanURL: http://www.world.sony.com


WTEC Attendees: C. Murphy (report author), T. Gutowski, R. Horning, P. Sheng

Host: Dr. Hideaki Karamon, Manager, Environmental Promotion Dept.

BACKGROUND

Sony is a global and diverse company with just under $70 billion in annual sales, for the year precedingMarch 31, 1999. Their operations consist of Group Headquarters, Digital Network Solutions, Home Network(TV and video), Personal IT (phones and PCs), Sony Computer Entertainment (play stations), Broadcastingand Professional Systems (studio cameras, etc.), Entertainment (movies, recordings), Insurance and FinanceBusiness, and Core Technology and Network Co. This last unit, Core Technology and Network Co., includesenergy, recording, magnetic, optical, ICs, manufacturing systems business, PWBs (Neagari), electronicdevices, LSI R&D, and core tech R&D). At the time of the panel’s visit, the company was undergoing amajor reorganization.

Sony has a strong interest in environmentally benign manufacturing and products, as evidenced by their 48-page environmental report. In August, they had worldwide ISO 14000 certification with distributions asfollows:

Manufacturing Non-manufacturing

Location ISO 14000 CertifiedSites

Total Sites Percent ISO 14000Certified

Sites

Total Sites Percent

Europe 12 12 100% 7 9 77.8%

U.S. 24 28 85.7% 0 19 0%

Japan 38 38 100% 8 42 19.0%

China 4 5 80% 0 1 0%

Asia, other 19 23 82.6% 7 17 41.2%

Total 97 106 91.5% 22 88 25%

PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION

Sony is currently responding to environmental concerns and regulations in Europe where they must competefor market share. One of the key areas that must be addressed is the European Union Directive on Wastefrom Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE). At the time of the panel’s meeting with Sony, Article 4of the third draft of this directive stated that, “member states shall ensure that the use of lead, mercury,cadmium, hexavalent chromium, and halogenated flame retardants (PBDE, PBB) be phased out by January 1,2004.” Germany has also imposed a dioxin ordinance as of July 16, 1999. In addition, there is significantpublic awareness of these issues through Eco-labeling (TCO 99, Blue Angel) and product test magazines(Consmentengids and Stiftung Warrentest—similar to Consumer Reports), that identify and downgrade


products that contain materials of concern. Recent technical publications report potential health hazardsassociated with flame retardants (Noren 1998; Sjodin 1999). Many of the major European companies(especially the Nordic ones) have self-imposed controls to eliminate PBDE/PBB and TBBA. The concernwith PBDE is its potential to be converted to dioxin upon incineration (a primary form of waste managementin Europe). While TBBA is more stable (less likely to form dioxin), there are still general health concernswith brominated products. In order of priority, Sony is focused on the elimination of halogenated flameretardants (used in plastics and printed wiring boards), lead (solder), and mercury (batteries). Dr. Karamonbelieves that elimination of lead will be the most technically challenging of the three.

CURRENT ACTIVITIES

Most of Sony’s efforts are currently concentrated in the area of elimination of halogenated flame retardants.For televisions, this includes both the plastic housings and printed wiring boards. Options being consideredinclude halogen-free phosphate esters and nitrite flame deterrents. Halogen-free boards are currently beingmassed produced, or are soon to be mass produced, and include double-sided CEM3, double-sided FR4, 4-layer epoxy-glass plated-through-hole (PTH), and 8-layer blind-via (BVH) boards. Due to low materialvolumes (for the alternative flame-retardant systems), Sony has had to absorb a 10% cost increase in anextremely cost-driven market. This is not as big a problem for single-sided boards (TVs) and double-sidedboards (VCRs) as it is for multi-layer boards, where material costs are high and volumes are especially low.

Siemens is currently working on similar problems. Their goals include the manufacture of all componentsusing Pb-free pins and solder joints, halogen-free plastic packages, and 100% recyclable materials. Inaddition, they are selecting low-energy manufacturing processes, and are designing components for low-power dissipation during use. However, they were recently forced to recall a number of parts due to thermalfatigue associated with Pb-free solder. Sony is very interested in cooperating with other companies on theseissues, as there may prove to be significant technical challenges.

NEEDS AND CONCERNS

Dr. Karamon believes that cost, not environmental quality, is the overwhelming purchase discriminator forthe Japanese consumer. In contrast, the European market appears to be relatively cost-insensitive. However,since it is not practical to have two separate product lines, Sony must find technologies that are both cost-competitive and environmentally sensitive.

A second issue is product take-back in both Europe and Japan. Sony has not yet determined how recyclingmight occur. Thermoplastics would probably be re-ground (rather than incinerated) and used in applicationswith broader mechanical specifications. One of the biggest concerns is collection at end-of-life. TVs areexpected to be very expensive ($30 to $40 per set) and the cost may have to be passed along to the consumer.However, this would affect all manufacturers, not just Sony.

REFERENCES

Noren, K. and D. Meironyte. 1998. Contaminants in Swedish human milk: Decreasing levels of organochlorine andincreasing levels of organobromine compounds. Organohalogen Compounds, vol. 38, p. 1-4.

Sjodin, A. et al. 1999. Flame retardant exposure: Polybrominated duphenyl ethers in blood from Swedish workers.Environmental Health Perspectives, vol. 107, p. 643-648.

Sony Corp. 1999. 1999 Annual Report.

Sony Corp. 1999. 1999 Environmental Report. The environmental report, which provides a great deal of additionalinformation and data regarding Sony’s efforts in the area of environmentally benign manufacturing, is available online at: http://www.world.sony.com/CorporateInfo/EnvironmentalReport/index.html. Objectives covered in thereport include increased recycling of industrial waste, decrease in all releases to water, air, and soil, decreasedenergy consumption, resource conservation, “green” purchasing, decreased disassembly time, energy-efficientproducts, and a higher product recycling ratio.

Sony Neagari Corp. Catalog of products (the PWB Division).


Site: Toyo Seikan Kaisha (Saitama Plant)950-2, HosoyaYoshimi-cho, Hiki-gunSaitama, 355-0193Japan


WTEC Attendees: P. Sheng (report author), D. Bauer, B. Bras, T. Gutowski, C. Murphy, T. Piwonka,J. Sutherland, F. Thompson, D. Thurston, E. Wolff

Hosts: Dr. Yoshio Oki, General Manager, Technology Assessment Office, Deputy DirectorMr. Makoto Horiguchi, Manager, Office of Environmental AffairsMr. Masa Morotomi, Manager, Strategy and Planning, Corporate R&DMr. Susumu Saito, Engineering Manager, Saitama Plant

TULC PROCESS FOR STEEL CANS

Can Industry in Japan

The demand for beverage and food cans in Japan is robust, with a 1999 market size of roughly 37.8 billioncans. Unlike the United States, where aluminum is the material of choice in cans, the Japanese market isdivided into 43% aluminum and 57% steel. Traditionally relegated to 3-piece cans, steel has made stronginroads in recent years to 2-piece cans mainly through the TULC process.

The main application area for cans in Japan is non-carbonated beverage containers, accounting for 57% oftotal can production. Beer containers account for another 19%; containers for alcoholic drinks, 11%; cans forcarbonated beverages, 8%; food packaging accounts for the remaining 5%.

Motivating Factors

The primary motivating factors for TULC development are:

• Economic viability of steel cans versus aluminum dictated a need to improve upon the steel DWI process(weight savings, per unit cost, recyclability)

• Demonstration project for CO2 reduction to comply with national target of 1% reduction per year inemissions

Description of the TULC Process

The Toyo Ultimate Lightweight Can (TULC) process is a combination of three innovations:

• Use of a TFS laminated with 20 micron thick polyester film on both sides

• A stretch draw and ironing process which creates thin side wall and bottom thickness without use of anylubricant or coolant, resulting in a can that is 4 grams lighter in weight (for a 350 ml can) compared witha steel DWI (draw and wall ironing) can. TULC bottom thickness is 0.18 mm, compared with a DWIcan’s bottom thickness of 0.225 mm.

• Development of a compact processing line which requires 50% less floor space and saves 48% inoperating and maintenance costs compared with a steel DWI can line.

The TULC process was introduced in 1991. Since then, shipments have grown steadily to almost 6.6 billioncans in 1999.

A key element of the TULC process is supply of the laminated steel, which is produced by Toyo Kohan, atinplate manufacturer and subsidiary of Toyo Seikan, from a Nippon steel stock material. The base cold


rolled TFS strip is heated, then a clear PET film lamination is applied on the inside surface, while a whitefilm is applied on the external surface.

Once the rolled steel is received at the forming line, the TULC-making process steps are as follows:

• Uncoil

• Cupping press

• Redraw press

• Heat-set oven

• Trimmer and light tester

• Printer and curing oven

• Necker, flanger and tester

Throughput rates are approximately 25 cans per second per line.

Environmental Advantages of TULC

TULC has shown environmental advantages over DWI processes in several areas:

• Energy consumption. TULC’s energy consumption is much lower than DWI can. TULC consumes anaverage of 0.09 MJ/can, while steel DWI can consumes an average of 0.35 MJ/can in can making, with alife-cycle energy consumption estimated at 3.9 MJ/can compared with TULC’s 2.79 MJ/can. AluminumDWI can consumes less energy in can making (0.22 MJ/can), but has higher life-cycle energyconsumption (6.0 MJ/can).

• Wastewater generation from cleaning. Use of forming lubricants necessitates a cleaning process andremoval of an organic waste stream. A typical steel DWI can line consumes 9,163 m3 of water per 50million cans at rinsing process after ironing. This usage is eliminated from TULC process by dryforming.

• Solid wastes with tin content. Solid scrap accounts for approximately 12% of raw material mass due topattern layout. The resulting scrap material in DWI can process, as well as quality rejects, has asignificant tin component (0.3% for DWI cans, 0.15% for welded cans) which becomes a mixed solidwaste and reduces recyclability. TULC improves the recyclability of the solid waste stream byintroducing no tin into the solid waste stream. In general, Toyo Seikan estimates a reduction ofindustrial wastes for a production run of 50 million cans from 88,200 lbs for the DWI process to 265 lbsfor the TULC process (waste solvent and lacquer).

• Carbon dioxide from incineration of exhaust gas from the curing oven for lacquer coating (epoxy andacrylics). DWI can process is estimated to generate 254 ton-C of carbon dioxide per 50 million cans,mainly through incineration of exhaust gas. By using PET as a laminate layer, which substitutes fororganic coatings, carbon dioxide emission can be reduced to 79 ton-C in TULC process.

Can Performance

Can performance can be measured by two factors: flavor absorption and migration of organic substances.The PET co-polymer film shows a 10-fold decrease in absorption of limonene under 20-50°C temperaturerange compared with conventional can lacquer. Water-based lacquer coatings performed as well as PET filmunder room temperature, but performance degraded as temperature increased.

TULC cans also showed a 2 to 3-fold reduction in KMnO4 concentration in the beverage compared to DWIcans under hot pack (100°C for 30 minutes) and retort (125°C for 30 minutes) conditions.

TULC System Considerations

Due to the simplified steps involved in the TULC process, the line structure also shows some advantages.TULC lines generally require 50% less floor space compared with DWI can lines. There is also a 42%reduction in operating cost compared with steel DWI cans. Major operating cost savings areas include


utilities (48% reduction in gas consumption, 38% reduction in electricity consumption), elimination ofwasher chemicals and water, and elimination of related industrial material handling. Maintenance costs arecomparable to, if not slightly higher than, DWI can lines. Line investment is on the order of $50 million perline.

OTHER INNOVATIVE PROCESSES

Toyo Seikan has also developed two other innovative can making processes:

• Aluminum TULC process. Toyo Seikan has modified the TULC process for aluminum can making, withinitially similar benefits over the aluminum DWI can process. Initial trials are still being conducted, sono quantitative data were given for aluminum TULC performance.

• Diamond Cut process. Toyo Seikan has been exploring techniques for improving the buckling strengthof thin-walled cylinders as a weight reduction measure. One technique, called “Diamond Cut,” uses arolling die to form a geometric pattern on the can side-wall to improve strength. This pattern is based ona pseudo-cylindrical concave polyhedral (PCCP) shell used in self-deploying space-based antennastructures, as well as inspired by Japanese origami patterns. Using “Diamond Cut,” a 30% weightreduction compared to conventional 3-piece cans can be achieved through reduction of side-wallthickness without loss of stacking rigidity.


Site: Toyota Motor CorporationToyota Kaikan Building1 Toyota-Cho, Toyota-shi,Aichi, 471-8572Japan

Date: 22 October 1999

WTEC Attendees: T. Gutowski (report author), D. Bauer, H. Morishita, T. Piwonka, J. Sutherland,F. Thompson

Hosts: Mr. Yutaka Okayama, Project Mgr., Environment Affairs Div.Mr. Tetsuo Iwai, Project General Mgr., Environment Affairs Div.Mr. Kiyoko Otsuka, Project General Manager, Corporate Public Relations Div.Dr. Hiroshi Igata, Assistant Manager, Technical Administration Div.,

DISCUSSION

It was clear from our visit that Toyota has a major commitment to improving the environment and reducingenergy and materials consumption at its plants. Starting in 1998 its management has preparedcomprehensive environmental reports for the company, which track expenditures, improvements, and outlinea wide variety of environmentally conscious activities in which they are involved. For fiscal year 1998Toyota estimates that it spent ¥97 billion on environmental related activities.

Some of these activities are implemented in the light of various regulations and agreements. For example,ISO 14001, the Kyoto Conference on global warming and the MITI recycling initiative for cars. It was alsovery clear that motivation to conserve energy and resources was already built into the system. The people atToyota saw these ideas as a logical extension of “lean manufacturing.” Furthermore, they conveyed to us theidea that the green approach was good for business. Toyota is a leader in developing clean burning enginesand technology to meet regulations, and gave every indication that they plan to continue to lead in this area.For example in autumn of 2000 they will introduce their hybrid electric car for sale in the United States. Thiscar, the PRIUS, is already on sale in Japan and some of the panelists had the opportunity to ride in it. Itsperformance in the city was quite satisfactory.

Some specific points that they discussed with panelists, or which were outlined in their booklet onenvironmental activities in the production area, are given below.

• Toyota has developed environmental purchasing guidelines for 450 suppliers. This includesencouraging suppliers to meet ISO 14001 by 2003, as well as asking suppliers for information on thematerials contained in their products. Toyota mentioned that they have significant purchasing power inJapan and most suppliers comply with their wishes, but some suppliers sometimes resisted disclosing thenature of the materials in their products.

• Toyota has identified painting as one of the highest priorities for attention in the manufacturingoperation. For example, in their 1999 environmental report they outlined techniques for reducing thewaste of paint and the reduction of volatile organic compounds (VOC).

• Toyota has made continuous progress in the reduction and elimination of landfill waste. For example,their waste from production has decreased from 143,000 tons in 1990 to 47,000 tons 1998. But much ofthis reduction has gone to material recycling.

• Toyota is looking at reducing waste at the processing level, including elimination of wasteful operationsand redesign of machine tools. For example, in their booklet they outline a machining process for dies,which originally included EDM. In the new process the part shape and dimensional tolerances areobtained directly by machining, eliminating several steps, including EDM. Toyota mentioned itsattempts to consider environmental consequences at the equipment design stage, and their environmentalreport shows a new lathe designed by Kyoho Machine Works. This machine is smaller in size and better


matched to the task than its predecessor. This new press-in unit also switches from hydraulic power toelectric power. This eliminates the need of continuously running hydraulic pumps.

• Toyota mentioned that they have set voluntary internal standards for waste and pollutants, and haveidentified over 2000 chemicals as substances to track and control.

• It was clear from discussions that Toyota hosts viewed the environmental movement in part as anextension of their “lean manufacturing,” which has a strong emphasis on the reduction and eliminationof waste. As an example in this area, hosts looked at energy requirements during production. Inparticular, it was pointed out how the energy consumption per unit tends to go up as production volumesgo down. Hence they are redesigning equipment to consume less energy or to be able to be turned offwhen not in use.

TOUR OF THE TSUTSUMI PLANT

The Tsutsumi plant is an assembly plant, which can make eight different cars. It is the mother plant to theGeorgetown, Kentucky, plant and supplies production engineering for the American plant. There are 5,600employees assembling 2,000 kinds of parts from 140 suppliers. The plant produces about 1,400 cars per dayover two shifts, during a five-day week. During the tour many standard and new features of the ToyotaProduction System were pointed out to panelists, including:• instruction sheets, which help the workers assemble different kinds of cars on the same line

• “kanban” cards which allows timely delivery of parts for assembly

• “himo switch” which allows workers to stop the production line in the event of a problem

• “Andon” board which shows the line supervisor where the problem is so that it may receive immediateattention

In fact, during the tour the panel saw the production line stop at least three times. Panelists also saw anumber of devices that made the workers’ motions easier and less stressful. These include: a synchronizeddolly which moved along with the car, carrying tools and parts; and a new seat which allowed the worker tosit down outside the car and then move into the car (called a Raku Raku seat). Also seen were plasticcoverings on the front and rear fenders of the car to protect it from bangs and nicks.

In general, employees contribute ideas for production improvement at an incredible rate, averaging about 10ideas per employee per year. Panelists were told that 97% of these ideas are implemented. Employeesreceive awards for the implemented ideas ranging from ¥500 to ¥300,000. Along one production line we sawfloor conveyors which allowed workers to move along with the car. One additional item, which wasmentioned to the panel just prior to the tour, was that Toyota is doing research into biological means for thereduction of CO2 and has developed trees that can absorb CO2 at approximately twice the rate of the typicaltree. These trees will be planted in Australia at a plantation for producing lumber and for cleaning up theenvironment.

TOUR OF THE TSUTSUMI RECYCLING PLANT

The aim is to reduce the quantity of landfill waste from the Tsutsumi plant to zero by the end of October1999. (Incinerated waste is also being reduced.) Tsutsumi plans on having no landfill material, and 1,300tons of incinerated waste, in 1999; but 90% of incinerated wastes are thermally recycled (landfill waste was568 tons and total waste was 7,032 tons in 1997). Materials previously landfilled numbered 28 differentitems. Activities are performed according to the philosophy, “When combined it’s waste, but when sortedit’s a resource.” Employees are encouraged to come up with ideas for waste reduction and reuse. Somesample projects include:

• Door trim. After die cutting door trim, excess material is sorted into vinyl chloride and urethane resin.The vinyl chloride is recycled and the urethane resin is incinerated at high temperature.

• Vacuum cups. Vacuum cups are used to transport parts in the pressing process. Previously, they werelandfilled at the end of their useful life. Now they are designed so that the materials can be separated,and the metal portion can be reused. (The rubber portion is incinerated.)


• Separating plant refuse. 190 tons of floor dust is generated per year, and 60% of this material is ferrous.The floor dust is separated in a multi-stage process. First, a rotary separator is used for rough sorting.Then, the smaller items are sorted in a 3-stage sieve-sorting machine. Next, further sorting occurs in aspecific gravity sorting machine. Finally ferrous items are separated with a magnetic sorting machine.The ferrous material can then be recycled, and is used for construction applications.

• Use of phosphorous sludge. The bricks for the pavement of the parking lot and tiles for the outside wallsof buildings are made (by an outside vendor) from phosphate sludge coming from cleaning prior topainting.


Site: University of TokyoDepartment of Precision Machinery Engineering7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-kuTokyo, 113Japan


WTEC attendees: D. Thurston (report author), D. Bauer, B. Bras, H. Morishita, T. Piwonka,J. Sutherland, F. Thompson, E. Wolff

Host: Professor Fumihiko Kimura

INTRODUCTION

Dr. Fred Thompson of the National Science Foundation first delivered an introductory talk describing WTECand the panel’s mission. Prof. Kimura then delivered a comprehensive and well-organized overview of hiswork in system modeling.

MAJOR PROJECTS

• Inverse Manufacturing Forum (sponsored by MITI)

• Alliance for Global Sustainability (MITI, ETH, UT)

• Intelligent Manufacturing Systems (intl. program with Europe, Japan, United States and Australia)

• Maintenance Engineering Chair

SYSTEMS MODELING OVERVIEW

“Virtual manufacturing” models products and manufacturing processes and their behavior. Simulation isemployed. Simulation is a very powerful modeling tool, useful for problems for which a comprehensivemathematical optimization model either cannot be determined, or cannot be solved analytically. It isespecially appropriate for problems where uncertainty regarding states and inputs can be modeledprobabilistically. In manufacturing, the goal has traditionally been to predict and avoid error, or productdefects.

An important EBM trend is the movement away from sale of physical products to sale of services. This trendhas resulted in a need to shift research focus from manufacturing processes alone to the product life cycle,which includes customer use and product maintenance. The core technology is in systemization of life-cyclemanagement of manufacturing knowledge, and prediction of product behavior through simulation.

The virtual manufacturing concept is thus extended to “design for the environment.” The entire product lifecycle should now be modeled, including maintenance engineering. “Information logistics” was cited as a keyconcept, which was defined as the “virtualization of products and processes” and developing products, whichcontain information regarding their life-cycle maintenance.

The step-function feature of the product quality control life cycle shows that product quality satisfiescustomer requirements at the time of initial purchase, but then slowly deteriorates after the initial purchasewith the passing of time. If the product is not refurbished, it continues to deteriorate until disposal isnecessary. If the product is refurbished, quality is then improved significantly, to satisfy customerrequirements. With several cycles of refurbishment, the product (and/or component) has a longer useful life.After several cycles of refurbishment, the product is “upgraded,” resulting in an even greater increase inproduct quality for the customer. As the focus changes from products to services, these refurbishments and


upgrades may or may not involve the physical aspects of the product, but rather new or improved functionsof the product.

In addition to traditional considerations such as initial manufacturing cost and product performance, newdesign decision variables (which result in tradeoffs) include:

• Design for long vs. short service life

• Design for high vs. low maintenance costs

• Upgrade/reuse at the factory vs. at user site

• Take-back cycle short vs. long

Marketing

Reuse of industrial components is not yet widespread in Japan, as in the auto industry. The focus here ismoving into the consumer product realm. Japanese customers are not willing to pay extra costs to “buygreen.” Although the marketing materials of Fuji Xerox include references to recycling and “aiming at zerolandfill,” it should be noted that their customers are in general corporations (who might be concerned abouttheir environmental image), rather than individual consumers. Prof. Kimura believes the trend is towardsindividual customers being more willing to “buy green” in the future.

Prof. Kimura mentioned that some companies keep repair costs high in order to stimulate greater demand fornew products.

Example Case Studies

Several case studies were presented, including a paper feed mechanism, refrigerator, fax machine andcamera. The camera example analyzed the shutter mechanism, where the wear effect on components wassimulated. They are integrating FMEA (failure modes and effects analysis) into the assembly of components.

SUMMARY

Significant work has been done in developing simulation models for the product life cycle, which includescomponent reuse. The trend from providing products to providing services was seen once again.

REFERENCES

Hata, T., F. Kimura, F. and H. Suzuki. 1997. Product life cycle design based on deterioration simulation. Proceedings:CIRP Life Cycle Engineering Seminar. Kluwer Publishers, pp. 197-206.

Kimura, F. n.d. Total product life cycle support with virtual products and processes. Methoden und Systeme zurVerbesserung von Productenwicklungsprozessen, pp. 282-290.

Kimura, F. 1998. Product design strategy based on classification of product life cycle scenario. Proc. InternationalProductionstechnisches Colloqium (PTK), pp. 337-343.

Kimura, F., T. Hata,, and H. Suzuki. 1998. Product quality evaluation based on behaviour simulation of used products.Annals of CIRP, Vol. 47, No. 1.

Kimura and Suzuki Laboratory. “ Development of a Life Cycle Design Support System,” Internal report for Alliance forGlobal Sustainability Project.


Site: Institute of Industrial ScienceUniversity of Tokyo7-22-1 Roppongi, Minato-kuTokyo, 106-8558Japan


WTEC Attendees P. Sheng (report author), D. Bauer, B. Bras, T. Gutowski, C. Murphy, F. Thompson,D. Thurston, E. Wolff

Host: Prof. Ryuichi Yamamoto, President, Ecomaterials Society

HISTORICAL CONTEXT FOR ECOMATERIALS RESEARCH

Ecomaterials Research

Ecomaterials research in Japan was initiated in 1992 as a response to the U.S. Office of Technologypublished report Green Products by Design. This report was critical of Japanese research efforts in greenproducts and spurred the Japanese government (especially MITI) to realize the importance of this field.

From 1993 to 1997, the Science and Technology Agency sponsored the first wave of activities through aNational Research Project on Eco-materials. The initial activities focused on four areas:

• Soft processing: CFC-free cleaning, soft solution processing and reversible interconnects

• Easily recyclable materials: ferrous and aluminum based alloys (Fe-C-Si-Mn, Al-Mg-Si, Ti-Al-Fe,Al-Si-Fe), in-situ composites, magnesium alloys for TV cabinets (National/Panasonic), Toyota Super-Olefin Polymers, super metals, soil ceramics and recyclable formed aluminum

• Biodegradable materials: polyactic acid fibers (all natural), biopolyesters

• Alternative materials: mercury- and cadmium-free electric cells, lead-free optics, Cu-Zn alloys, PVC,halogen and lead-free electric wire, lead-free solder alloys and piezoelectric ceramics, porous clay fibercomposites (substitute formed styrol), chromium-free Ecosteel with no dioxin emissions(PEP+Zn+steel), asbestos alternatives and green building materials

In 1997, the second stage ecomaterials research project was initiated with new material classes added:

• Renewable materials: chemically treated wood, wood and bamboo-ceramics, Misawa wood, eco-packaging, Kenaf pulp and bamboo-aluminum composites

• Recyclable materials: eliminate Cu and Zn impurities from Fe, bonded magnetic materials (Sm-Co, Nd-Fe-B), eco-cement using industrial wastes, TULC steel can, tile from discarded glass and recyclablePWBs

• Functional materials for energy applications: amorphous Fe-Si-B, electric double layer capacitors,thermo-electronic devices, solar cells, smart windows

• Long-life materials: durable concrete.

Other Research Initiatives

In 1995, MITI initiated a three-year study focused on inverse manufacturing (systems and process issuesrelating to disassembly, sortation and demanufacturing). In 1996, United Nations University initiated aresearch project on Zero-Emission Industry Clusters, which sought to refine the eco-park concept anddevelop supply chains where waste materials from one facility become the raw materials of another.

In 1998, MITI initiated a National Research Project on Life-Cycle Analysis (LCA). A key challengecurrently facing researchers is the determination of a single index for LCA. Issues include characterizing


quality and design of materials, as well as performance definitions. One attempt by Prof. Yamamoto toexplain a single environmental index focused around eco-efficiency, defined as:

Eco-efficiency = Performance / Life-cycle impact

Where performance and life-cycle impact are a summation of several different factors. Each factor isnormalized with respect to national emission levels and weighted to reflect regional importance. Impactfactors considered include ozone depletion potential, acidification potential, and POCP.

GROWTH OF GREEN PURCHASING

Japanese consumers are generally believed to be more environmentally conscious compared to their U.S.counterparts. Market research in Japan indicates that approximately 20% of consumers in Japan can beclassified as “green” consumers—that is, they are willing to pay a premium for green products. Withincreasing citizen awareness of landfill, dioxin and nuclear issues, green products have received highervisibility recently.

In business, the Green Purchasing Network was established in 1996 by the Japan EPA to set a guideline forgreen shopping and provide impact information on specific products. At some major companies, such as FujiXerox, the CEO ordered procurement specialists to purchase green products at an allowable 5% premiumover regular products. The Taiwanese government is establishing similar guidelines with a 10% premiumallowed.

DEVELOPMENT OF LEGISLATION AND CERTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS

The Japanese government initiated a packaging law in 1999 and will begin enforcing an electronic appliancerecycling law starting 2001 (air conditioners, ranges, refrigerators and washing machines). Computingequipment will be the next class of products regulated. Japanese companies are currently piloting recyclingprocesses based on this driver.

Currently over 2,300 sites in Japan have become ISO 14001 certified, including many non-manufacturingsites. Japan’s eco-mark Type 1 eco-label has been certified for over 3,300 products, but has not metwidespread acceptance. MITI has also initiated a pilot study for introducing a Type-3 eco-label. Currently,each company self-certifies based on its own set of metrics.

FUTURE RESEARCH DIRECTIONS

Future research efforts on eco-material will focus on 11 topics:

• Material flows and rucksack analysis

• LCI/LCA

• Design for environment

• Clean technologies (return, reuse, remanufacture and recycle primary metals, rare earth, plastics,electronic materials, etc.)

• Renewable and biodegradable materials

• Alternative materials

• Functional materials (remediation, restoration, enzymes, energy)

• Safe disposal of toxic materials

• Standardization of recycled materials

• Material selection for packaging, electronic appliances, etc.

• Education and training


REFERENCE

Yamamoto, R. 2000. “Eco-innovation through green purchasing and investment.“ Paper presented at PACIFICHEM2000 Conference, Hawaii USA, December.

218

APPENDIX E. SITE REPORTS—UNITED STATES

Site: Applied Materials2901 Patrick Henry DriveSanta Clara, CA 95054URL: http://www.amat.com

Date: January 20, 2000

WTEC Attendees: C. Murphy (report author), D. Bauer, E. Wolff

Hosts: Terry Francis, CTO, Environmental Solutions Products Division

BACKGROUND

Applied Materials, one of the world’s leading manufacturers of semiconductor equipment, offers equipmentfor most of the major processes used in wafer fabrication and in flat panel display manufacture. They beganproducing etch equipment approximately 20 years ago and expanded into CVD (chemical vapor deposition)and CVD/etch in the late 1980s. During the last five years their most aggressive advancements have been inthe areas of CMP (chemical mechanical polishing) and copper interconnect (including both Cu metallizationand low-K dielectric). The relatively new business group, Thermal Process and Implant, includes RTP (rapidthermal processing), epitaxial processing, and ion implant. Through acquisitions over the last few years theyhave moved into the equipment markets for reticle inspection, wafer defect detection and review, andmetrology. With this month’s purchase of ETEC, a mask making company, they plan to enter the maskmaking and inspection market, including reticle production. Applied Materials equipment is used in virtuallyevery wafer fabrication facility in the U.S. and in most of the world.

Environmental efforts at Applied Materials are focused on helping their customers achieve better solutions.Areas of key concern are energy and water reduction and management of post-process waste, includinggases. They have been a close partner with SEMATECH, and in cooperation with them have focused on thefour environmental thrust areas identified by the SIA Roadmap, including reduction of PFC emissions,qualification of new chemicals, reduction in energy and water usage, and integration of ESH (environmental,safety, and health) impact analysis capability. In addition, Applied Materials is on the Industry AdvisoryBoard for the NSF Center for Environmentally Benign Semiconductor Manufacturing at the University ofArizona. Through their facilities in Asia and Europe and a partnership with Infineon’s “Fab of the Future” inDresden, Germany, Applied Materials also has an appreciation of the environmental needs of thesegeographic areas as well as of the U.S.

MEETING

Problem Identification

One of the primary concerns for Applied Materials in the Environmental Solutions Products Division isidentifying the drivers for improving environmental factors for the semiconductor industry. The generalfeeling is that the industry is responding reactively to individual symptoms rather than proactively toidentified, prioritized, root causes that are understood as part of a systems analysis.

In the context of life-cycle assessment (LCA), Applied Materials personnel believe they have reasonablygood inventory data. However, there are currently very little impact data, so while qualitative effects withinthe industry can be estimated, the quantitative impacts of the industry and the impacts relative to otherindustries are not well understood. For example, the semiconductor industry uses a great deal of electricity,so an understanding of the impact of power plants might be key to wafer fabrication. In the third area of

Appendix E. Site Reports—United States 219

LCA, improvement, the primary concern is the apparent lack of understanding of the tradeoffs involved (i.e.,there is significant potential for an improvement in one area to lead to a detriment in another). This isparticularly true for yield, which is the paramount driver in semiconductor manufacturing. In addition, since“you can’t fix what you can’t measure,” data are again an issue. Applied Materials also sees the need forenabling tools for analysis.

Applied Materials has manufacturing sites in Israel (metrology), England (implant), Austin, Taiwan, Korea,and Japan. In general they have found it critical to “act globally and react regionally,” and to be sensitive toeach individual culture (e.g., Japan is not Korea). They believe that this understanding will be critical inaddressing environmental issues as well.

Current Activities

Applied Materials is engaged in a general program to improve environmental activities within the company,including DFE (design for environment) training for their employees. The ISO 14000 process is being phasedin, based on its importance to the region and business unit. This is driven by customer requirements for ISO14000 certification, as a condition of future equipment procurement. Applied Materials also identified anunexpected secondary benefit that was expressed by nearly every company that was visited on this trip: inaddition to achieving the targeted environmental goals, focusing on environmental quality resulted inorganizational and behavioral changes that decreased operation costs and improved overall product quality.

One of the key focus areas for Applied Materials is more efficient operation of the equipment that it suppliesto its customers. They are working in partnership with Radian to develop a protocol to monitor energy usethat is based on the recognition that energy consumption is not just a function of kilowatts per hour, but alsoon duty cycle, harmonic distortions, etc. In addition, “non-value-added resource evaluation” is used toidentify process changes that can decrease start-up and idle times and equipment changes that can improveefficiencies. For example, a dual pump system for processes that must be performed under vacuum utilizes aremote (i.e., outside the clean-room), conventional pump for the initial pump-down, and a light, integratedpoint-of-use pump near the equipment to maintain vacuum pressure.

Applied Materials is currently working with UC-Berkeley to develop a tool-specific, module-based modelcalled “Environmental Value Analysis.” This is intended to provide a dynamic rather than a flat-sheet modelto accommodate rapid changes in the semiconductor industry as well as variations due to geographiclocation. One of the areas of particular interest is water reduction, especially in the CMP process. Cascadingwater-use (i.e., from processes with tighter requirements to those with looser requirements) and waterrecycling are being evaluated.

While the focus is on the “use” phase of semiconductor processing equipment, “acquisition,”“manufacturing,” and “end-of-life” phases are also considered. There is a trend toward casting rather thanmachining equipment components, which results in better quality parts in addition to having a lowerenvironmental impact. All product releases require that certain environmental criteria be met. At the initialend-of-life, Applied Materials will buy back, refurbish, and resell its equipment (customers must clean theequipment before shipping). Applied Materials had an incident in 1982 with its underground tanks thatcaused a site to be identified as a Super Fund Site. The effort to clean up the water, and to meet changingwater quality standards, continues, with no external funding by the government.

Needs and Concerns

Several areas of concern were identified by Applied Materials. The key technical issues revolve aroundincreasing efficiencies and process control. As concentrations decrease, the dynamic ranges increase,making control much more difficult. This is an issue in the area of cleans where extremely dilute solutionscan be used, but only if they are even more pure than the ultra-pure solutions that are currently in use. (Note:“cleans” is a term used in the semiconductor industry to describe dilute wet-chemical (usually acid) processesthat are intended to remove residual organics, thin oxidation layers, and/or particulate matter. Thesechemical cleans are typically followed by one or more rinse-steps.)

Appendix E. Site Reports—United States220

The process area where the most work will need to be done is in the area of metal deposition, especially withthe increased use of organo-metallic precursors. The thermal budget of silicon is lower than is optimal forthese materials, so it is likely that catalysts will have to be developed in order to avoid use of excessiveamounts of gas required to get the desired deposition rates.

Management of gases downstream from etch and deposition processes also poses environmental challenges.For example, the fluorine used in etching produces undesirable by-products. If there were a process to forma benign dry-cake, rather than a wet-cake, the material could be reused. Operating pressures for manyprocesses range from 100 to 10-9 torr, and gas separation for these high vacuum systems is problematic; cryo-pumps collect in a batch mode and separation has to take place off-line. Other pumping options are typicallynot viable because they have moving parts, and are therefore particulate generators. New materials beingused in semiconductor manufacturing contain environmentally undesirable elements such as Ba, Sr, and Pb.Methods for keeping these out of the waste stream are of interest.

Climate control is a potential area of improvement. Chillers, as operated today, are relatively inefficient.They often try to maintain temperatures that are 2 to 4 degrees different from ambient. If the delta wereinstead about 15 degrees, they would operate much more efficiently. Depending upon local weather patterns,there could be as much as a 40% gain in power efficiency if the temperature of the fab could be increased by8 to 10 degrees.

Applied Materials expressed a need for the development of an infrastructure and communication protocolthat would enable them to take advantage of activities and modeling efforts taking place outside thesemiconductor industry. The sense was that there may be solutions available to the semiconductor industry ifthe needs and constraints could be effectively communicated. One of the key issues is the extreme need forcontamination-free environments at levels that are unique to this industry. This parameter is typically notfully appreciated by those outside semiconductor manufacturing. An evaluation tool that integrated the entireprocess flow (i.e., system level analysis) and which helped prioritize improvements also would be of value.

Applied Materials supports a closer alignment of industry and academia, but feels that this will require thatstudents and/or faculty spend time in the manufacturing environment in order to sufficiently understand theissues and parameters. One solution that was suggested was development of intern programs.


Site: Caterpillar Inc. Remanufacturing FacilitiesCorinth and Prentiss, MS501 Cardinal DriveCorinth, MS 38834

Date: 19 January 2000

WTEC Attendees: T. Piwonka (report author), B. Bras, E. Wolff

Hosts: M. Bridges, C. Meteer, L. West, S. Stark, E. Mathison

BACKGROUND

Caterpillar’s remanufacturing operations began in 1972 in Bettendorf, Iowa, and the Mississippi facility firstopened in 1982. Caterpillar has a corporate commitment to the environment in its manufacturing operations.A corporate publication stated in 1992 that “Caterpillar is committed to safeguarding the environmentwherever it conducts business. We will establish, maintain, and follow environmentally responsible policiesand practices; comply with applicable laws in both ‘letter and spirit;’ and respond openly and promptly toresponsible inquiries about environmental issues as they relate to Caterpillar and its products. Morespecifically, we will:

6. Incorporate environmental considerations into design and manufacturing processes and ensurecompliance by Caterpillar facilities worldwide.

7. Develop and apply technologies and processes that prevent pollution and minimize all forms of waste,especially hazardous waste. When waste prevention, avoidance, reuse and/or recycling aren’t practical,we will handle and dispose of waste in a manner consistent with environmental regulations and publicinterest.

REMANUFACTURING OPERATIONS

Caterpillar operates three facilities in the Corinth area. The Sawyer Road plant receives incoming materialfor remanufacture. All remanufacturing assemblies, which include engines, hydraulic assemblies, cylinderpacks, water pumps, fuel pumps, oil coolers, injectors, or other assemblies are called “cores.” Sawyer Roadreceives an average of 160 tons of assemblies for remanufacture each day. Parts are cleaned and sorted at thisplant. Dealers send the parts to Corinth; they are encouraged to use the packaging that the remanufacturedparts are shipped in to ship other parts back to the plant.

The Cardinal Drive plant remanufactures diesel engines, crankshafts, blocks, and other components. Atpresent eight engine models are remanufactured. However, each model has a number of variations, so thenumber of different engine types remanufactured is larger. Remanufactured engines are brought up to currentdesign standards, are tested before shipment and receive the same warranty as new engines. They estimatethat one of their engines should be remanufactured at least three times before it cannot be used again.

As not all components are recoverable, new parts are used where necessary during the remanufacturingprocess. New material content of cylinder blocks is currently 32%, cylinder heads 45%, and othercomponents 35%. They are aggressively attempting to reduce the new material percentages, and havereduced usage from an historical average of 50%. The amount of scrap metal recycled to their foundry inMapleton, Illinois, in 1999 was 235,526 lbs. of aluminum alloy, 16,865,767 lbs. of cast iron, and 5,680,509lbs. of steel.

Most of the refurbishment of individual engine components consists of building up the worn surface bythermal spraying, laser cladding and welding, and then machining and grinding down and honing newsurfaces. Many components are deliberately designed to permit one or two remanufacturing operations


without requiring surface material addition. They have developed a proprietary method of repair welding castiron in cylinder heads that produces a satisfactory cast iron structure. They are able to repair small (up to 1.5inches in diameter) holes in engine blocks that result when the engine throws a rod (such engines arewhimsically referred to as “ventilated blocks”). They are attempting to eliminate chromium platingoperations by the use of thermal spray.

Cleaning operations include oil and grease removal, carbon build-up and paint removal, and rust removal.They use a mixture of baking soda and 10% alumina grit to remove paint and other surface contaminants.The liquid waste from the cleaning processes currently is being sent to a facility that uses it as a reagent inthe neutralization of acidic liquid wastes from other companies, so this waste is not considered to be ahazardous waste. Even so, Caterpillar has reduced its liquid waste from 9 to 4.5 million pounds per year atthe Corinth plant and aggressively pursue more environmentally friendly products to use in their processes.They recycle all packaging material; what they do not use internally, they sell to other manufacturers.

They have won several pollution prevention awards and have been recognized by the state of Mississippi fortheir recycling efforts. Once a year they hold an “amnesty day,” where members of the community can bringhazardous materials (such as paints, thinners, etc.) to the community collection site, where Caterpillar helpsothers dispose of them. They also started an Earth Day celebration for area fourth grades where they teachenvironmental awareness and stewardship. They have expanded this to include other area industries and civicgroups and will present their program to 2000 fourth graders from five counties this year.

The Prentiss facility remanufactures pumps, cylinder packs, connecting rods and oil coolers. Componentssuch as turbochargers, starters, alternators, governors, and compressors are returned to the original equipmentmanufacturers, as are transmissions, clutch plates, brakes, hydraulic cylinders and rods, and electronics. ThePrentiss facility is a team-oriented plant, while the other plants are more traditional top-down management. Anumber of operations are highly dependent on the skill of individuals who have specialized in repairs of thatparticular component during their employment at Caterpillar.

Plant personnel identified a number of areas where technology is needed to improve remanufacturing yields.These include:

• Process modeling for improved accuracy—e.g., a model of weld repair of compacted graphite iron

• Reduced energy consumption, particularly in the area of preheating in welding

• Higher strength materials, especially those used for surface restoration

• Reduced emissions from welding fumes

• Better, more environmentally friendly methods of paint and carbon removal, such as radical oxidation ofsoot, resonant frequency separation, or surface charge manipulation

• Recyclable cleaning fluids

• Better repair welding methods (current techniques produce too much porosity in welds)

• Low cost methods of crack detection and crack growth detection in castings and forgings

• Life prediction modeling to better predict remaining fatigue life in components

• Low cost inspection methods for cracks and coating adherence

• Separation methods to removal metal particles from the blast media

• Very low cost radiographic computer automated tomography scanning technology for receivinginspection

• In-process analytical tools that monitor the quality produced during the rebuild process

• Decision tools to determine the best process and cost alternatives in addition to life-cycle analysis

An interesting point made by plant personnel was that as components are designed to be lighter for betterenergy efficiency in operation, it becomes increasingly difficult to remanufacture them, and the number oftimes they can be recycled decreases. They also mentioned that paints and protective coatings that have to beremoved in remanufacturing should be designed with remanufacturing in mind. In other words, it should beeasy to remove, but still protect the component or assembly. One point brought up by a panelist was that as


remanufacturing increases, the flow of scrap to the foundries, where it is an important part of the metalliccharge, will decrease, driving up the cost of raw materials for the primary manufacturing operations (forgingand casting).

Caterpillar expects to remanufacture its engines, and upgrades them each time they are remanufactured. Thissuggests that one marketing strategy to encourage remanufacturing would be to call it “planned upgrading.”

The operations in Corinth were clearly being carried out with enthusiasm by the workforce and themanagement. Personnel have an understanding of the challenges and opportunities in recycling.


Site: Casting Emission Reduction Program (CERP)McClellan Air Force BaseTechnikon LLC5301 Price Ave.McClellan, CA 95652


WTEC Attendees: E. Wolff (report author), D. Bauer, C. Murphy

Host: George Crandell, Product Test Engineering Manager

CERP was established in 1994 as a public/private partnership consisting of and representing the Departmentof Defense, EPA, USCAR, American Foundrymen’s Society (AFS), and CARB. Initial funding provided$50 million to establish this center at a soon-to-be-decommissioned site within McClellan AFB. The originalpublic funding is coming to an end and current operations have been targeted for closure by the Air Force,but the facility is in the process of obtaining additional funding to continue ongoing research andtransitioning into a private research facility.

The principal CERP function of evaluating and assessing foundry process materials and the products’contributions to overall environmental impact, health, and risk issues had concentrated on development ofmeasurement techniques and analysis. CERP made use of a state-of-the-art casting pilot system (includingsix-tons/hour electric coreless melting system) that includes full functional mold/core making capabilities,pouring stations, and casting shake out. During the first four years, its demonstration services focusedlargely on evaluating new foundry binder systems, equipment testing, and measurements instrumentationdevelopment.

Recently efforts have shifted towards new foundry process development and foundry process modifications,such as thin-wall iron castings and development of the advanced oxidation process for emissions reductionvia in-process analysis. CERP has formed partnerships with various universities and technical organizationssuch as Penn State, UC-Davis, University of Alabama-Birmingham, and AFS to work on this and otherfuture projects. Technology transfer for emission testing between the stationary and mobile emission sourcesis also a major area of research in cooperation with the American Industry/Government Emission Research(AIGER) program.

Advancements for additional process modifications and emission prevention could benefit from heat transfermodels that incorporate kinetic reactions; however, current CERP funding will not permit such work.

Phenomena that lower emissions when treated water is injected (misted) into the exhaust system should beinvestigated. Such fundamental work should receive attention to avoid costly filtration and chemicaltreatments envisioned with current technology.

CERP would welcome NSF/DOE support for these initiatives.


Site: Chaparral Steel/Texas Industries300 Ward Rd.Midlothian, TX 76065

Date: June, 27 2000

WTEC Attendees D. Allen (report author), T. Gutowski, C. Murphy

Hosts Jon Brown, Manager, Environmental Services, Chaparral SteelMark Hill, Plant Manager, Midlothian Cement Plant

INTRODUCTION

Chaparral Steel is a core facility in an industrial complex that also includes an automobile shredding facility,a shredder flotation/separation facility, a cement plant, and an electric power plant. Members of the panelwere interested in visiting this location because of the material exchanges that occur between the facilitiesand because of the role that the facilities play in product end-of-life management. The visit was arranged byGordon Forward and was conducted by Mark Hill (Plant Manager) of the Midlothian cement plant and JonBrown (Manager, Environmental Services) of Chaparral Steel.

Mr. Forward was the CEO of Chaparral Steel and has been active in the Business Council for SustainableDevelopment (BCSD). After Chaparral became a part of Texas Industries, which owned the cement plant atthe Midlothian site, Mr. Forward initiated one of the most successful of the material exchanges at theMidlothian site. Slag produced at the steel mill, which had been a waste, is now ground into small aggregateand sent to the cement plant, where it is fed directly to the kiln. The use of slag as a cement kiln feed has anumber of advantages beyond the obvious advantages of reducing material use and waste generation.Because the chemical form of the slag is a desirable intermediate in the formation of Portland cement, use ofthe slag reduces the need for some endothermic reactions, and therefore reduces some of the energy demandof the kiln. The lime-iron derivatives found in the slag also reduce the need to generate CaO in the kiln fromlimestone (calcium carbonate, CaCO3). Since the reaction to form CaO from limestone generates carbondioxide, use of the slag reduces generation of carbon dioxide. The environmental and economic benefits ofthis material exchange led Chaparral to commercialize this technology. The technology is now licensed toother cement/steel facilities.

OPERATIONS

The use of slag from the steel mill in the cement kiln was the earliest and most successful material exchangeat the Midlothian site; others are planned or in place. For example, the cement kiln currently uses wastesolvents and other waste organics for fuel. Calcium sulfate recovered from sulfur scrubbers will be used inthe cement kiln and reduce the need to use naturally occurring CaSO4 (gypsum or anhydrite), which iscurrently mined and transported from Oklahoma. In addition, carbon monoxide evolved during cementmanufacture is used to reduce nitrogen oxides to nitrogen and oxygen. Other exchanges are being examinedthrough a network of companies organized by Mr. Forward and a company spun off from the BCSD (GulfCoast).

While the material exchanges occurring between facilities at Midlothian are novel, it should be noted that theindividual facilities are also proactive in their environmental performance. For example, the cement facilityis converting from a wet to a dry operation, which will reduce energy consumption and air pollutantemissions. In addition, the steel mill relies on iron recovered from scrapped automobiles, white goods andconstruction/demolition wastes. The recovery of iron from these sources is very efficient; however, theprocessing of scrapped automobiles, white goods and demolition wastes generates shredder residue, which iscurrently landfilled. To recover materials from this residue, which is primarily a mixture of non-ferrousmetals and plastics, Chaparral Steel installed a multi-stage flotation separation device that separates metalsfrom plastics, and halogenated from non-halogenated plastics. The use of these separated materials has been


hampered, however, by the presence of trace levels of PCBs in the residues. The source of the PCBs appearsto be capacitors and other electrical devices found in the source material. Identifying capacitors and othersources of PCBs within the diverse waste streams entering the facility is extremely difficult, yet just tracelevels of PCBs can compromise the uses of the materials that could be recovered from the shredder residue.The challenge that Chaparral is facing in dealing with trace contaminants in product end-of-life managementis likely to be duplicated by other product end-of-life management facilities.

OBSERVATIONS

The panel had three primary observations from this site visit:

• The Midlothian site provides a highly successful example of material exchanges between facilities

• Individual facilities at Midlothian are aggressively pursuing environmental improvements within theirfacilities, in addition to pursuing material exchanges

• The presence of trace contaminants in materials recovered from end-of-life products is likely to posesignificant challenges in the use of these materials


Site: DaimlerChrysler Corp.CIMS 482-00-51800 Chrysler DriveAuburn Hills, MI 48326-2757

Date: June 14, 2000

WTEC Attendees: J. Sutherland (report author), D. Bauer, T. Gutowski, C. Murphy

Hosts: Ross GoodNeil P. McKayPatricia A. StrabbingW. Charles MoeserKay F. BedenisMichael J. CurryKevin SlusarczykJackie SavageAnn Schlenker

BACKGROUND

DaimlerChrysler is one of the world’s leading automakers with headquarters located in Stuttgart (Germany)and Auburn Hills, Michigan (USA). The visitors met with a large group of individuals representing variousorganizations with environment-related missions. Following the merger in 1998, DaimlerChrysler had 180manufacturing plants, 440,000 employees, and sales of approximately $132 billion. Vehicle manufacturingaccounts for 85% of sales (other business units include financial services, telecommunications, andaerospace). The hosts spoke with the visitors for about three hours on a range of topics relating toDaimlerChrysler and the environment.

ENVIRONMENTAL DIRECTIONS

In company literature, Werner Pollmann, Chief Environmental Officer of DaimlerChrysler AG, has writtenthat, “Protecting the environment and conserving the natural foundations of life are fundamental tasks forDaimlerChrysler...” With this backdrop, discussion first focused on the motivational factors forDaimlerChrysler’s attention to the environment. Factors described included (i) compliance with regulations,(ii) cost, (iii) competitiveness, and (iv) concerns over hazardous materials. It was noted that “green” needs tobe considered as a part of everything that is done and that it needs to be reflected in attitudes and not justtechniques. Also discussed was the fact that a balance must be achieved between environmental issues,vehicle cost, quality objectives, customer satisfaction, and product marketability. When any of theseobjectives conflict, a solution must be identified that responds to relevant system constraints (e.g.,compliance with applicable regulations) and best responds to the objectives. It is believed that the bestpossible outcome also adds value to a DaimlerChrysler vehicle.

In a dialogue about the environmental challenges faced by DaimlerChrysler it was indicated that thecompany has always maintained a very proactive stance in regards to new regulatory requirements likeMACT (Maximum Achievable Control Technology). In fact, it is often the leader in setting new industrystandards in the U.S. It appears that, in contrast to their colleagues in Europe, the environmental staff in theU.S. spends much more of their time engaged in paperwork and permitting activities. It was reported that insome cases the permitting procedure may be inhibiting positive environmental changes, because any changein process, materials or controls will trigger a time consuming permit review (up to 18 months in some cases,even for minor changes.

As part of its Community Environmental Awareness Project, DaimlerChrysler is the one of the firstautomotive companies to include the surrounding communities, state agencies, environmental groups, andplant specialists in putting together information that explains the manufacturing processes in the plant. This


also includes an explanation of how the environment is impacted or preserved as both compliance andproactive initiatives are pursued (e.g., the Sterling Heights Assembly Plant).

Very often, the environmental concerns of the auto industry are directed at the consumer use of the vehiclesthemselves. The concerns include the use of a diminishing carbon-based fuel resource, CO2, SOx, and NOx

emissions, other hazardous airborne pollutants, and a variety of miscellaneous pollutants. A California studythat found that 90% of the emissions are produced by 2-5% of the vehicles on the road (and almost alwaysthese tend to be older vehicles) was then discussed. This then led to an exchange about alternativepropulsion technologies (i) fuel cells, (ii) electric vehicles, and (iii) hybrid vehicles. The importance ofconsidering full fuel-cycle emissions was emphasized (e.g., power plant emissions for an electric vehicle).The PNGV (Partnership for New Generation Vehicle) is on schedule to produce an up to 80 mpg prototypevehicle by 2004, but this vehicle may not meet the lofty emission standards or affordability goals set for thevehicle. Diesel technology is of interest particularly for near mid-term CO2 reductions. It was postulated thatfuel cells might represent the long-term solution, although they are unlikely to be affordable for severaldecades and will probably require significant fueling system infrastructure modifications (e.g. H2 storage).

In terms of water quality, DaimlerChrysler has several plants in Mexico with technologies that allow them tobe zero wastewater producers. As with most automotive plants near metropolitan areas, the plants in theDetroit area pre-treat their wastewater before discharging it to publicly owned treatment works (POTW).The concern was expressed that perhaps too much attention has been focused on point source discharges.These discharges have been regulated and their pollutant load has been reduced through the use of expensivetreatment technologies. It was suggested that not enough attention is being devoted to non-point sources (e.g.,agricultural runoff and storm water) which go untreated into water streams. The issue of water qualitystandards was discussed, and in particular the differences between pesticides and dissolved metals. Wateranalysis was also addressed, for example the effect of using regular versus reagent water and lab-to-labvariability—these issues point to the need to establish an acceptable testing standard.

Talk then shifted to the environmental issues associated with manufacturing processes. Cutting fluids andfluids from parts cleaning operations represent significant components in the wastewater effluent stream.Metals mixed with fluids are classified as contaminated scrap that carries with it a disposal cost—if the fluidswere eliminated, the metals could be resold. Painting processes remain an environmental concern (in termsof energy, materials, air emissions, and solid waste disposal), as manufacturers move from solvent-based towater-based to powder paints. The pre-coats applied prior to the painting operations also presentenvironmental concerns (whatever technology changes are considered, they must still produce a Class Asurface). One answer to the challenge could be injection-molded components with molded-in color. Castingsand is yet another environmental challenge—rather than landfilling used sand, alternative uses for the sandare being explored (e.g., construction).

By 2002 all Chrysler group facilities will be certified according to the EEMS (Enhanced EnvironmentalManagement System) which is more stringent than ISO 14001. EEMS certification is performedindependently by the U.L., and the whole EEMS process is tied to DaimlerChrysler’s ISO 9000 process.Both the hosts and visitors discussed how ISO 14000 requires: a company-wide awareness, more than just apaper-work exercise, a significant training commitment, and company-wide standardization. Of course,whether it is EEMS or ISO 14000, any successful environmental system must be integrated into the fabric ofthe company (i.e., made part of the day-to-day activities), it cannot be viewed as a separate environmentalprogram. DaimlerChrysler is trying to more fully integrate life-cycle analysis and other DFE tools into theirengineering design activities.


Site: DRI/HBI Use in the EAF – An Idea Whose Time Has Come?A Seminar presented by Midrex Direct Reduction Corp., Corus Tuscaloosa,

Corus Mobile and American Iron Reduction, at The University of AlabamaBryant Center, Tuscaloosa, AL

Date: April 30 – May 2, 2000

WTEC Attendee: T. Piwonka (report author)

Hosts: Dr. Sara Hornby, Franz Sammt, John P. Kopfle, all from Midrex

The seminar was attended by 80 people, from all over the world, and included a tour of Corus Tuscaloosa, amini-mill owned by Corus, the Company formed by the merger of the integrated steelmakers, British Steeland Hoogovens, which owns the Beverdijk, Holland, plant that was visited.

DIRECT REDUCTION OF IRON ORE

The manufacture of steel begins with iron oxide, which is the form the ore takes in most commercially viabledeposits. The ore is reacted with carbon in the form of coke in a blast furnace to form iron that contains about4.5% carbon in solution. To make steel, which contains between 0.01 and 2% carbon, this iron is reacted withoxygen. Carbon dioxide is produced in three areas during this process: during coking in the coke plant,during the reaction of coke with iron ore, and when oxygen is blown through the molten iron/carbon alloy.

A number of years ago a more direct method was developed: reacting the iron ore directly with a reducinggas, such as reformed methane (CH4) which generates carbon monoxide (CO) and hydrogen (H2) to reducethe oxide directly to form pure iron. This process has been growing for a number of years, and now isresponsible for a significant amount of new iron introduced into the steelmaking process. The processconserves energy, as it takes place in the solid state rather than the liquid state, and eliminates one of thegreenhouse gas reactions, as well as using a greenhouse gas, methane, as the reactant. The process is knownas “Direct Reduction of Iron” or DRI. If the products, which are small spheres of iron about ¼" to ¾" indiameter, are briquetted into larger pieces (measuring 5" x 3" x 2"), the product is known as “Hot BriquetteIron,” or HBI. In 1999, 38.6 million tons of DRI and HBI were produced worldwide, consuming about 20%of the total iron ore produced.

DRI is primarily used in electric arc furnaces (EAF) as part of the solid charge. EAFs were designed tooperate on solid charges of steel, generally scrap. “Hot metal” (liquid metal pig iron directly from the blastfurnace) is rarely used. EAFs have been the primary melting unit in mini-mills, the (relatively) small steelmanufacturing facilities that have transformed steelmaking in the United States. It is difficult today to obtainhigh purity scrap, since much current scrap reflects the alloy purity specifications of one or two decades agowhen specifications were not as stringent. Today, however, it is recognized that it is necessary to producesteels with low “residuals,” as unwanted elements are called. DRI, which consists of pure iron with a smallamount of oxide, is an attractive addition to the charge mix of EAFs. Interestingly, a few large foundryorganizations are considering converting from cupola operations to DRI-fed EAFs as their primary meltingsources, mainly to reduce the energy consumed in operating baghouses and other ancillary equipmentrequired for cupola melting.

Unfortunately, due to the economics of the DRI process, it isn’t possible to completely reduce the ironcontained in the ore in the DRI process. Also, between 2.5 and 5% of the DRI is “non-metallic” or “gangue”that contains unreduced oxides—CaO, SiO2, Al2O3, MgO, etc. Carbon in the DRI exists primarily as ironcarbide. When the charge melts, the unreduced iron oxide is exposed to the iron carbide, which reduces it andgenerates energy during the reaction (thus forming a greenhouse gas, CO2). Depending upon the level ofcarbon in the DRI, and the site specific EAF operation, the electrical energy requirement from the arc can bereduced.


In operating an EAF to produce steel, the object is to melt the solid charge, which consists of scrap, DRI, andslag-forming materials such as lime, adjust the steel bath chemistry, and pour the steel. Chemistryadjustments, which include obtaining the proper carbon content as well as that of other desired elementswhile eliminating unwanted elements such as sulfur and phosphorus, require reactions with the slag thatfloats on top of the bath of molten steel. The science of steelmaking essentially consists of adjusting the slagso that it reacts properly with the elements in the bath of molten steel. In some cases there is no way toremove elements: for instance, copper, once in the alloy, cannot be removed. To lower the coppercomposition, it is necessary to dilute the alloy with pure iron. (The copper content of automotive scrap isgenerally higher than desired, as copper wiring in the vehicle is often entangled in the chassis during theshredding operation. EAF operators today consider copper in steel scrap a major problem.)

The slag recommended for use in EAFs is a “foamy” slag, one that contains tiny bubbles of CO. Foamyslags help insulate the steel bath and the electrode, and minimize heat loss. Foamy slags are created by thereaction of carbon and oxygen from the above mentioned oxides contained in the DRI, or from iron oxide(rust) on the scrap. However, it is hard to obtain an exact balance of carbon to oxygen in the charge make-up,and it is often necessary to add carbon (in the form of coke, graphite or coal) or oxygen to the bath byinjecting them through a lance.

The DRI process is inherently a clean process, especially when reformed methane is used as the reductiongas, as the amount of carbon dioxide formed is minimized, and methane itself is consumed. When DRI isused as feed metal in EAF production of primary steel, CO2 generation is cut 25 to 35% over basic oxygenfurnaces, and a similar amount when it is substituted for pig iron in electric furnaces. When it is used toproduce steel in mini-mills that combine it with scrap, CO2 generation is cut nearly 90%.

As the use of EAFs has grown worldwide, heat times have decreased. Steel mill EAFs are built in a range ofsizes, but most are in the 120 ton–150 ton range. It is normal to have heat times of 55 minutes or less (i.e., toproduce 100 to 140 tons of steel from solid charges in 55 minutes—there are losses in slag and gaseouswaste). One steel mill has reported heat times of under 30 minutes. From a greenhouse gas emissionsstandpoint, however, faster heat times are pushing the ability of the electrical generation systems to provideenough kW in the short time allotted for the heats.

Of course, as the amount of electricity used increases, the energy costs of the heats also increase. Steelmakerscurrently operate EAFs in the range of 280–425 kWh/ton (especially for scrap charges), depending on thelocal cost of electricity. There are a number of methods of reducing the electrical energy required: a DRIplant can be combined with an EAF, and the hot DRI charged directly into the EAF (although attempts to doso present formidable logistics problems for “brown field” sites). Energy for the process can also be derivedfrom the chemical reactions that occur in the bath, especially the exothermic reaction between carbon andoxygen. This last reaction is the reason that some steelmakers prefer (or make) DRI with carbon contentsdeliberately raised to 1.8 to 2.8%, and then inject oxygen, or, alternatively, they will add carbon to the bath.While this lowers production costs, it increases greenhouse gas generation. One variation on this is tocombine EAF dust from its baghouse (which is essentially iron oxide) and oily mill scale (also iron oxide,containing the hydrocarbons in metalworking lubricants) into a dry mix that is injected into the bath. Thisprocess provides a source of carbon and oxygen, and at the same time eliminates a source of landfill wastethat the mill would otherwise have to dispose of.

The push for higher productivity (shorter heat times = lower cost/unit) in the steel industry is leading to thedevelopment of hybrid steelmaking processes that use scrap, pig iron, DRI or HBI, and carbon and oxygenadditions to provide the extra energy units necessary to accelerate the process. It is hard to say whether thispractice will increase or decrease the total greenhouse gas generation, as it is dependent on the method ofelectricity generation. As a first approximation, one would expect a decrease as the chemical energy is beingused at the point of production (in the steel bath) rather than being generated at a distance and sufferingtransmission losses on its way to the steel.


Site: DuPont Experimental Station(Telephone Conference)Wilmington, DE 19880-0302

Date: June 21, 2000

WTEC Attendees: T. Gutowski (report author), C. Murphy

Host: John Carberry, Director, Environmental Technology

BIG PICTURE

Our discussion with John Carberry ranged over many important topics, including the chemical industry as awhole as well as DuPont’s response to environmental issues. From a historical perspective, the chemicalindustry was one of the first targeted groups for environmental action. Over the last 15 years the progress ofthe industry has been significant. One can see DuPont’s progress by going to their Web page anddownloading their progress report for sustainable growth. Examples of DuPont’s recent progress include67% reduction in air toxic emissions since 1987, 87% reduction in airborne carcinogens since 1987, 39%reduction in greenhouse gases since 1990, 20% reduction in the Kyoto basket of gases since 1990, and flatenergy consumption since 1990—in spite of a 28% increase in production. Perhaps one of the most dramaticstatistics is that while DuPont was experiencing something over one hundred environmental incidents in theearly 1990s, over the last two years they have had just two incidents in each year. Furthermore, as newindustries are included in the toxic release inventory reporting requirements, it is now becoming apparent thatthe chemical industry contribution may be small compared to others.

Nevertheless, much needs to be done. In spite of a 30% reduction in global hazardous waste since 1990, thecompany still produces in excess of 1.5 billion pounds of hazardous waste from their U.S. facilities alone(1998 data, from DuPont, Sustainable Growth Progress Report 1999). Furthermore, DuPont has found newreasons for being environmentally friendly. They have moved from a position of regulation compliance toone of being proactive, and in fact, seeing environmental issues as an important point for competition. Thisnew attitude is clearly stated in DuPont’s 1999 progress report on sustainable growth: “We affirm to all ourstakeholders, including employees, customers, shareholders and the public, that we will conduct our businesswith respect and care for the environment.”

At this point our discussion turned to the complexity of the issues. For example, simply outlawing certainproducts or materials in the United States can result in them showing up at other places in the world. To aidin their assessment of environmental impacts, DuPont uses a variety of tools, in particular life-cycleinventory, and convenes a strategic environmental leadership group that reviews environmental issuesbusiness by business. The review of issues frequently uses a template based on the “Seven Concepts forSustainability” developed by the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD) andadapted (internally) for the chemical industry.

RECYCLING OF POLYMERS

Increasingly DuPont finds that customers are looking for recycled content in their products. DuPont haspioneered the recycling of polyester (see the E.I. du Pont de Nemours site report on our discussion withRobert Hirsch, Managing Director of DuPont Polyester Technologies). Our discussion of polymer recyclingconcluded that economic viability is still difficult, in large part because of collection economics. An exampleof a recycling technology which is feasible, but not yet economical, is methanolysis of polyesters. A successstory for recycling involves the Tyvek® envelopes, which meet the requirement of UPS for 25% postconsumer waste at acceptable cost. These strong durable envelopes are made from recycled milk bottles.Nylon 6 and 66 can be recycled, much of it coming from carpet. Again the issue is the collection and reverselogistics. In addition, future designs that incorporate fewer materials into the carpet design could makerecycling economically viable by reducing separation costs. The recycling of plastics from automobiles may


present certain advantages because of the collection infrastructure already in place in the form of the 10,000automobile dismantlers in the United States.

PROCESSING

DuPont continually works on their chemical processing operations, often to reduce energy or emissions fromtheir operations. In addition, DuPont has found it to be a good business strategy to expand that capability toalso take on environmental issues for their customers. Several examples of this are listed below

• Dying the yarn at DuPont rather than at the customer’s.

• Reformulation of photosensitive materials using both reformulated products and solvents. DuPontchanged the formulation to eliminate a regulated solvent and also takes back spent solvent from thecustomer.

• Disposing of packaging. DuPont now produces bags that are compatible with their chemical contents.They have a bag called “ROTIM” which stands for “Return or Throw in Mixer.” That is, the bag ismade of materials similar to its contents so that it may be crumpled up and thrown into the compoundingmachine, once the pellet contents are used up.

• Developing aqueous developers to replace solvents.

• Developing water soluble box liners for agricultural chemicals—which can be dissolved in theapplication spray tank when empty, eliminating the need for the farmer to dispose of the empty box(regulated toxic waste).

• Reducing the hazard of polymer compounding by reducing the amount of unreacted monomer in thepolymer.

• Supplying painted car parts at the manufacturer’s site, versus just paint. In fact, they are very interestedin looking into the “rent a chemical” business.

We also discussed biotechnology’s advantages and pitfalls. They are focusing their attention on very highvalue added items, such as value added crops. Some of the advantages of the biomaterials approach includerenewable raw materials and more benign processing operations. However, there may be some downsides,including more energy intensive, more wastewater, and higher cost raw materials. Hence, biomaterials andbiotechnology should not be seen as a magic silver bullet to solve environmental problems.

RESEARCH AGENDA FOR NSF

John Carberry suggested areas where NSF might focus their attention:

• Look at energy production trade-offs for alternative schemes, including biomass. There is a need totrack and quantify unit productivity versus impact on the environment. Fundamental science is neededhere.

• PBT Predictive Models Based on Structure.

• NSF could play an important role as an organization which can convene the debate concerning bio fuels.

• Much attention should be focused on catalysts, particularly metal lignand and others that are “leave-incatalysts,” to reduce the toxicity of polymers.

• Research is required to look into how to drive polymerization to higher levels and thereby reduceunreacted monomers in polymers.


Site: E.I. DuPont de Nemours(Telephone Conference)iTechnologies14 T.W. Alexander DriveP.O. Box 13999Research Triangle Park, NC 27709URL: http://www.dupont.com

Date: May 4, 2000

WTEC Attendees: C. Murphy (report author), T. Gutowski

Host: John W. Lott, Chief Environmental Officer, iTechnologies

BACKGROUND

DuPont iTechnologies, formerly known as the Electronic Products Division, is one of the most significantgrowth platforms within DuPont. The technology-driven portfolio provides differentiated, materials-enabledsolutions for basically all of the world’s leading manufacturers of electronic components and assemblies,packaging graphics, and producers of high-end commercial printing. The products are comprised of high-value materials and are based on DuPont’s unique competencies in photopolymers (light-sensitive polymers),polyimides (temperature-resistant polymers), fine particle dispersions, films and laminates, and end-usedevelopment.

DuPont was highly involved in DARPA’s Environmentally Conscious Manufacturing Program, and incooperation with MCC managed two projects to look at alternatives to constructing printed wiring boards:fully additive copper with photoimagable dielectric and permanent photoresist. Both technologies wereshown to significantly reduce water consumption and waste.

INDUSTRY OVERVIEW

Flame Retardants

Two key concerns for the electronics industry are flame retardants and lead-free solder. These are largelydue to the European Commission's Directorate-General (DG) Environment directive on waste electrical andelectronic equipment (WEEE). The directive bans the use of lead, mercury, cadmium, hexavalent chromiumand certain flame retardants (PBB and PBDE) as of 2008. The concern with flame retardants is that theymay form dioxins when incinerated (the primary method of plastics disposal in Europe and Japan). While itis accepted that chlorinated materials (among them fire retardants) lead to dioxin formation, there seems to beconsiderable doubt as to whether the same is true for the specific brominated fire retardants that are currentlyin use for electronic products. Further complicating the problem is the temperature at which the plastics areincinerated. The temperatures at which European plastics are burned are apparently high enough to preventformation of dioxins. In Japan, however, older incineration units are used, and there is concern that they areincapable of reaching sufficiently high temperatures.

The IPC trade association, which represents manufacturers of printed wiring boards (PWBs) has a task forceon flame retardants. John Lott provided us with copies of several presentations made during their mostrecent meeting. PWBs are typically constructed using epoxy-based resins (thermo-sets) for which there areno obvious alternative flame retardants. The IPC task force is beginning to investigate possible solutionswith a focus on technical performance and cost. One approach is to use large organic aromatic molecules ornitrogen containing compounds that don't burn well. This works for polyimides, but not all other laminatematerials.


The exterior cases for electronic products are constructed of thermoplastics. The most common of these arePC/ABS and ABS, which are flammable. Among the alternatives to brominated fire retardants that are beingexplored for thermoplastics are inorganic fillers such as MgO. However, these inorganic fillers require veryhigh loadings that can have significant consequences for mechanical strength and electrical properties andtherefore cannot be used in all applications. Another alternative is red phosphorus. However, phosphoruschemistry is not something that is commonly understood. When these flame retardants are burned, phospho-organic compounds could be formed that are very similar to nerve gas.

The point was made that it would be helpful if a new flame retardant was used by a larger industry in order todrive the economies of scale. For example, many of the current flame retardants are used in the garment andfurniture industries, which use much larger volumes than the electronics industry. It would also be useful toknow the full impact of proposed substitutes on the environment and human health.

Lead-free Solder

The European WEEE Directive also calls for the elimination of lead solder. Anticipation of the enactment ofthis directive has lead to a worldwide search for alternative materials and has bred international competitionto use these solutions as a marketing strategy. What has been demonstrated by this free market dynamic isthat solutions that are often welcomed as significant improvements to the environment because theyeliminate an identified problem are often not fully evaluated themselves and may lead to additional problems.A case in point was the award winning “green” disk drive that was built with a bismuth solder instead of alead solder. This, of course, eliminated lead, but the end-of-life treatment of the new bismuth solder was notwell thought out. In fact, the bismuth solder was refused by the usual metal recycling industry because agreat deal of their business involves recycling of copper and bismuth is a significant contaminant of copper.Therefore, the metal recycling industry did not want to handle bismuth at all. The story underlines theimportance of thoroughly evaluating alternatives and suggests a potential inefficiency in free marketcompetition when the environmental directive is not clear about the evaluation of the alternatives.

Other alternatives to Pb-solder materials typically use tin, copper, and silver, all of which have other issuesassociated with them that need to be investigated prior to extensive implementation. Examples of potentialproblems include possible metal migration and thermal aging that could result in reduced product reliability.In addition, most of the Pb-free solders require higher processing temperatures and will necessitate the use ofsubstrate materials with higher Tgs than currently used. Most epoxy-glass laminate material has a Tg of140°C; the new solders will probably require substrates with a Tg in excess of 160°C. This means that inaddition to the energy increases required during the solder operation, the lamination process during PWBfabrication would also require higher temperatures. As this is the most energy-intense step in the creation ofa board, this would have a significant effect on the overall energy-consumption budget.

Plastics Recycling

A primary barrier to plastics recycling is the low cost of virgin material relative to recycled. One of the costdrivers in plastics recycling is reverse distribution. This could be solved in part by using small, localized,modular “green factories” to reduce waste plastic to monomers. The factories would be modular so that theycould be easily changed depending upon the feedstock. The transportation of the “harvested” monomer,which is quite dense compared to the waste plastic, would greatly improve the economics of this process. Dr.Lott mentioned a number of places where plastics recycling to the monomer level is currently taking placeincluding a DuPont factory in Canada (reducing nylon to its monomer constituents). Delphi Automotiveclaims that they are doing closed-loop recycling of post-consumer PVC and polyester.

Flat Panel Displays

DuPont is interested in becoming a supplier of flat panel displays and/or the components thereof. Theirmove into this market would represent a collapse of the supply chain, which would greatly reduce theenvironmental impact for producing these displays and offer the opportunity to participate in take-backactivities.


PARADIGM SHIFTS

DuPont has been very involved in materials (such as photo-polymers) that can be used to fabricate PWBsusing blind microvias instead of plated through holes (PTH). This approach results in much denser wiringand requires fewer layers. This not only allows for boards to be smaller and thinner, but the electronicperformance is also significantly improved. In general, these processes use less energy, water, and polymer.Another area of interest is light-pipe circuitry. The biggest technical challenge will be connection to the chip.


Site: E.I. du Pont de Nemours(Telephone Conference)Barley Mill Plaza, Bldg. 27/1156Wilmington, DE 19880-0027 USA

Date: June 13, 2000

WTEC Attendees: C. Murphy (report author), T. Gutowski

Host: Dr. Robert G. Hirsch, Managing Director, DuPont Polyester Technologies

BACKGROUND

DuPont spun the very first Dacron® polyester fiber in 1949 and historically has been the world’s largestproducer of polyester. Polyethylene terephthalate (PET)—polyester—is used in a multitude of products,including textiles, industrial fibers, food containers and bottles, video and audiotapes, electrical insulationand capacitors, and hundreds of different kinds of films. In the early 1990s, DuPont developed a process forregenerating polyester, referred to as Petretec(SM) technology. This process reduces polyester back to theoriginal starting materials, and as such it can handle relatively high levels of contamination and is also FDAapproved.

TECHNOLOGY

DuPont’s polyester regeneration technology is based on a process called methanolysis. This process, whichconverts post-consumer polyester waste into its constituents, dimethylterephthalate (DMT) and ethyleneglycol (EG), was demonstrated in a Cape Fear, North Carolina facility where an existing DMT productionunit was converted into a 100 million pound per year “pilot” plant. One of the primary benefits of thisprocess is its robust character, with the ability to tolerate up to 5% contaminants in the input stream. Thispilot plant clearly demonstrated the technical feasibility of the process by producing material that isindistinguishable from virgin. At the time the pilot plant was established, polyester bottle resin prices werebetween 65 to 75 cents a pound. Prices later fell to 32 cents per pound, the worst price drop in a 40-yearhistory. If prices had held at the historical average of 55 to 60 cents per pound, the process would have beenviable at volumes of a hundred million pounds a year. DuPont remains committed to licensing thetechnology. It was estimated that for the Cape Fear facility, the feed stream including collection and cleaningneeded to be available at 10 cents a pound or less to make the process economically viable. For comparison,note that in many parts of the country landfill costs are on the order of 2 to 4 cents a pound, but their costs arerising steadily and the number of landfills is dropping precipitously.

There are multiple ways to recycle polymers. The most basic involves collecting, cleaning, melting andrepelletizing. After this there are a variety of “depolymerization” techniques which break down the polymerto varying degrees. For polyester this includes glycolysis and hydrolysis. Finally, one can drive the reactionbackwards to the original components. For polyester this step can be done by methanolysis, which isaccomplished by exposing the polymer to vapor phase methanol at high temperature. In general, as youproceed down this chain, the recycling process becomes more robust and can handle increasingly higherimpurity levels.

INFRASTRUCTURE

The biggest barriers to plastics recycling are frequently related to infrastructure, particularly reverse logisticsand material preparation. Polyester is often recovered as film, which needs to be densified, or as polyesterbottles, which need to be “chipped.” The material then goes through a separation process (frequently densityfloat), washing, filtration, and possibly densification prior to introduction to a chemical process.


Site: Federal-Mogul Corp.World Headquarters26555 Northwestern HighwaySouthfield, MI 48034

Date: June 14, 2000

WTEC Attendees: D. Bauer (report author), T. Gutowski, C. Murphy, J. Sutherland

Hosts: William J. Zdeblick, Director, R&DRoger Strelow, Director, Environmental, Health, and Safety

BACKGROUND

Federal-Mogul is a tier one automotive supplier, focused on powertrains (engine systems) but with businessin other areas, such as lighting, brakes, wiper products, and ignition products. Current overcapacity in theindustry (~20%) is creating business pressure to consolidate. In the past three years, partially as a result ofnumerous acquisitions, business has increased from under $2 billion to $7 billion. The large number of newacquisitions makes business practice standardization challenging. OEMs are also transferring someengineering responsibility to the larger suppliers, such as Federal-Mogul. This is making business morechallenging.

ENVIRONMENTAL, HEALTH, AND SAFETY PRIORITIES

Federal-Mogul’s EHS practices have traditionally focused on worker safety, using a safety scoring system(metrics such as work lost/ hours of operation) and compliance with local environmental regulations. Underthe influence of ISO 14000, environmentally beneficial efficiencies (energy, material use, etc.) which alsoresult in cost savings receive higher priority than non-environmentally beneficial potential cost savings. Thesentiment was expressed that people in R&D and engineering need to become more versed in environmentalissues so that new product development can be influenced earlier in the design cycle.

The majority of Federal-Mogul’s plants recycle items such as chips and stamping punchouts, but there are noexplicit requirements. Quantities of landfill waste are product-dependent. Waste chemicals are hauled bycertified materials haulers.

MEETING CUSTOMER DEMANDS

Economics

Federal-Mogul clearly feels pressured by cost competition. Particularly in the U.S., cost is seen as thedominant decision driver for automotive customers; it is perceived as the primary focus for purchasing andsales in the OEMs. (In Europe the cost to quality importance ratio is more like 50/50.) Commonly, otherattributes, such as precision and environmental performance, are constraints. (This means that improvementsbeyond the required levels are perceived to bring little benefit to Federal-Mogul.) Sentiment was alsoexpressed that easy availability of price information over the internet and the increasing use by the OEMs ofinternet auctioning for commodity parts is exacerbating the price squeeze.

Manufacturing Process Standardization

There is desire to internally standardize manufacturing processes (both technologically and environmentally).This is an important aspect of Federal-Mogul’s management system, and is challenging due to the largenumbers of recent acquisitions. These are smaller companies that may be based in global regions that havedifferent manufacturing process environmental priorities. A case was mentioned involving the use of TCE.


There is also pressure to manufacture according to the OEMs’ desired practices; OEMs want to minimizerisks associated with the introduction of new manufacturing processes. EPA also has a set of recommendedbest practices. For innovative new processes, the burden of proof is on the supplier. For a supplier, the pathof least resistance is clearly to abide by these process standards.

ISO 14000

ISO 14000 will soon be a requirement for doing business. (It will probably not be a competitive advantage inthe meantime.) Ford and GM have recently announced ISO 14000. Ford, in particular, has been helpful withISO training seminars for suppliers. Federal-Mogul EHS policy mandates that all plants should be ISO14000 certified no later than 2002.

Transition to Systems Design

With the transfer of engineering responsibilities from OEMs to suppliers, there is a corresponding shift fromcomponent (commodity) manufacture to system design and manufacture. For example, rather than producingpistons to certain OEM-specified tolerance quality specifications, there is a shift to producing engine systemswith specifications such as noise, fuel economy, etc. Better performance under these system specificationscan command a higher price (though OEM purchasers still may try to substitute lower cost components intodesigned systems). Thus, movement towards system design can lead away from exclusive focus on costtowards a more balanced focus on quality, and functional and environmental performance.

OTHER REQUIREMENTS

There is an electromagnetic energy standard in Europe that requires that electronic components are silent 30feet away.

Beyond ISO 14000 certification, OEM requirements are generally “cookbook” constraints on materialcontent, etc. Requirements relating European product take-back laws have not yet been transmitted throughthe supply chain.

PRIORITIES FOR FUTURE WORK

Research priorities include cleaner foundry technologies, more benign hard coatings (such as anodizing, hardplating, etc.), and more environmentally benign cleaning technologies. Another important area is facilitatingaccess to environmental technologies through better data and information exchange protocols. Hybridvehicles are seen as viable, and Federal-Mogul could build a hybrid engine. Some skepticism was expressedabout fuel cells and explosion risks.


Site: Ford Motor CompanyFord Research LaboratoryPO Box 2053Dearborn, MI 48121-2053URL: http://www.ford.com

Date: June 15, 2000

WTEC Attendees: C. Murphy (report author), D. Bauer, T. Gutowski, T. Piwonka, J. Sutherland

Hosts: R.C. McCune, Manufacturing SystemsJ. Braslaw, Materials Science Dept.K.A. Waskiewicz, Facility Environmental ProgramsJ.C. Trabin, Advanced Manufacturing EngineeringI. Skogsmo, Environmental Safety PlanningR. Frederick, Corporate ResponsibilityR.S. Marano, Chemical EngineeringB.R. Kim, Chemistry Dept.S.A. Pezda, Emissions Control AnalysisR.A. Pett, Materials Science Dept.J.L. Sullivan, Chemistry Dept.

BACKGROUND

Ford Motor Company was founded in 1903 and has its headquarters in Dearborn, Michigan. FordAutomotive Operations (FAO), which consists of Ford, Mercury, Lincoln, Volvo, Mazda, Aston-Martin,Jaguar, Land Rover, and Th!nk, is the largest producer of trucks and the second largest producer of passengercars and vehicles worldwide. 7.2 million vehicles were sold in 1999, for a sales revenue total of $137billion. In addition to FAO, Ford Motor Company includes Ford Motor Credit Company, Ford Motor LandServices Corporation, Quality Care, Kwik-Fit, and the Hertz Corporation.

William Clay Ford, Jr. (Chairman of the Board) and Jacques Nasser (President and CEO) have both madepublic statements regarding Ford's commitment to the “triple bottom line” (financial, environmental andsocial) and plan to create future markets based on a wide-range of stakeholders. One of the primary goals ofthe Ford Environmental System, implemented in 1996, is ISO 14001 certification on a global scale. FourFord plants were the first automotive manufacturing facilities in North America to receive ISO 14001certification and all manufacturing sites were certified by 1998. The company is now working with its firsttier suppliers to help them become certified as well. Facilities such as the new assembly plant adjacent to theRouge River in Dearborn, will be designed for a high level of environmental consciousness.

OPERATIONS AND MANUFACTURING

Environmental considerations in vehicle manufacturing are covered by five primary goals: (1) substitution ofmanaged materials, (2) decreased resource consumption, (3) increased use of light weight materials andoptimized structural designs, (4) pollution abatement, and (5) health and safety. One of the greatestenvironmental challenges to Ford (as with all automotive companies) is the painting process. While there hasbeen an 80% reduction in solvent emissions (pounds per vehicle) in the last 20 years, this is still the largestarea of concern. If all waste products and emissions for the painting process are taken into account, VOCs(Volatile Organic Compounds) are by far the most significant, accounting for 80% of the TRI (Toxic ReleaseInventory) data. Ford is pursuing five basic research areas for potential emissions reduction. These are: (1)paint-booth airflow, (2) controls for phosphate bath chemistry, (3) high transfer efficiency, (4) decreasedvolume of solvent, and (5) paint-booth simulation. Ford is investigating biological removal of VOCs fromair and water used in painting operations.


The results of an investigation that examined VOC emissions from various paint systems were presented.The study included Ford and non-Ford plants worldwide. A plant using water-based slurry clear coatproduces 20 g/m2, whereas a plant using solvent-based clear coat (with vapor controls in place) produced13 g/m2. The explanation for these unanticipated results lies in where the system boundaries are drawn. Ifthe entire process is taken into account, the solvent-based paint has lower VOC emissions (g/m2) than thewater-based paint because the equipment for the water-based system is much more difficult to clean andrequires solvent to do so. A European competitor's plant using powder primer was found to produce 47 g ofVOC emissions per m2 of painted surface, contrary to the perception of lower emissions from powder paint.This is because the reporting requirements are such that a plant using powder paint for any of the three coats(primer, basecoat or clearcoat) need not report, and hence control, VOCs from other coating steps. Therefore,as is indicated by Ford's findings, actual overall emissions from a plant using powder paint can be higherthan those from a plant using solvent-based paint with proper VOC controls in place.

The second greatest area of environmental concern is metalworking, where spent metalworking fluids andpart-wash water are major sources of oily wastewater. Ford has found that one of the most effective meansof reducing water usage is simply metering its use in order to increase awareness. In addition to washerprocess control, recycling methods incorporating oil removal and recovery have resulted in an almost totallyregenerative system in one manufacturing operation (transmissions). Various physical, chemical andbiological methods for treating the oily wastewater are being investigated. Oil mist reduction strategies and“dry” or “near-dry” machining are also under investigation and development. In conjunction with WayneState University and the Lubrizol Corporation, Ford has developed a shear-stable polymer additive to reduceoil mist from metalworking operations.

Energy reduction is also of general concern. Ford's goal for the year 2000 is to reduce energy consumptionby 2.25% , which they believe will be a challenge. In addition, they will be purchasing energy from naturalgas rather than coal-fired sources whenever possible.

Material Selection

Ford has had longstanding programs in the development and use of lightweight materials—includingpolymers, composites, aluminum, high-strength steel, and magnesium—for reducing overall vehicle weightwith attendant improvement in fuel economy. A number of manufacturing issues surround the widespreaduse of these materials in mass-manufactured vehicles. For example, typical concerns in manufacture ofaluminum-intensive vehicles include the use of adhesives, sealers and fasteners for aluminum panels, whichalso increases difficulty of disassembly and recycling at end-of-life. Ford is also exploring increased use ofpainted plastic panels for exterior surfaces.

Life Cycle

Ford has had an active life-cycle group for the past eight years. The goal of this group is to help develop apicture of what it really means to be sustainable and identify how to get there. They have done extensivework in life-cycle inventory, a portion of this in conjunction with USCAR, and are now focusing on impact. In particular, they are trying to define a few of the most relevant categories. Boundaries are drawn aroundthe factory and to some extent include Ford's suppliers, with the view that this is the appropriate sphere ofinfluence. A major problem is the availability of information for the processes and materials considered foranalysis. The need for an international (or at least a national) database was expressed.

Recycling

Ford seeks to be a leader in both recyclability and the use of post-consumer recycled materials in its products.In their 1999 Environmental Report (p. 19) the Focus is highlighted as an example. This car has an 85%recyclability potential by weight and has been designed to facilitate dismantling. (The American PlasticsCouncil has recently initiated development of a roadmap to address the use of plastics in automobiles, with recovery and recycling being strategic targets.)

In order to more fully understand and capitalize on the dismantling aspect of the recycling process, Ford hasrecently acquired 25 automobile dismantlers. These dismantlers receive between 3 to 5 cents per pound for


the vehicle hulk from the shredder, plus any values for the dismantled parts. In subsequent steps of vehicleshredding and materials processing, the metallics constitute the primary value source with most plasticscurrently remaining as auto shredder residue (ASR) which is either landfilled or may be used as a fuel source.The apparent paradox between end-of-life vehicle value based on weight by the dismantler, and needs forweight reduction of the vehicle, may favor the fuel economy benefit of weight reduction in the long run. Agreater difficulty is associated with economic reclamation of polymers if their use fraction continues toincrease.

The cost of recycling can be minimized in areas where parts or materials are already being recovered orwhere recovery is relatively simple. For example, the recycling of polypropylene cases used for batteries iseconomic because the acid and lead are already being recycled. Also, the polyethylene film used to covernew seats is easy to collect at the dealer.

Aluminum recycling is expected to be a challenge, largely in the area of sorting wrought from cast metal. This issue would potentially have a large influence on the economics of mass-produced aluminum bodystructures and their recycling. Other areas where work is needed for improved recycling capability aresurface technologies and material identification (especially metals with binary systems such as high copperaluminum, black plastics and rubber products).

FUTURE ACTIVITIES AND CHALLENGES

Among Ford's challenges in the years ahead are the homologization of its business units to exploit bestpractices and methods in areas such as the environment, while also maintaining the individuality anddistinctiveness of its brands. Volvo, for example is highly regarded with respect to its concern for theenvironment in its facilities and products, so that, for example, the parent organization may capitalize on anexisting experience and knowledge base which can be shared throughout the enterprise. In the case of theemerging network of dismantlers, it may be possible, for example, to develop and incorporate a unifiedmodel for the appropriate environmental management system, thus exploiting the more specialized nature ofthese businesses and building on a common theme. In the context of ISO 14001, Ford is developing auniform set of metrics, especially for VOC emissions and waste, that will allow for a universal coding,performance rating, and reporting of quarterly data.

Over the years, there has been a significant shift in thinking within Ford from a focus on “end-of-pipe”solutions to manufacturing emissions, to those emphasizing minimization and prevention. The greatchallenge ahead, as with many manufacturing companies, lies in the holistic integration of “design for theenvironment,” in which the product, manufacturing and environmental communities work concurrently onthe totality of product “systems,” which now include their manufacture, use and disposal.


Site: General Motors Corp.Chemical & Environmental Sciences LabGM Research & Development Center30500 Mound RoadWarren, MI 48090-9055

Date: June 16, 2000

WTEC Attendees: J. Sutherland (report author), D. Bauer, T. Gutowski, C. Murphy, T. Piwonka

Hosts: Jerry D. RogersRonald L. WilliamsS. Darsh KumarAlan K. Henry

BACKGROUND

Founded in 1908, General Motors is the world’s largest industrial corporation and vehicle manufacturer. In1998, GM employed 594,000 people and partnered with over 30,000 supplier companies worldwide. GMhas manufacturing facilities in 30 countries, and in addition to its automotive operations also has otherbusiness interests (e.g., financial/insurance services (GMAC), locomotive group, and Hughes ElectronicsCorporation). The corporate revenues for 1998 were over $155 billion and 83% of the revenues wereassociated with automotive operations. General Motors Automotive Operations includes: (i) GM NorthAmerica (Buick, Cadillac, Chevrolet, GMC, Oldsmobile, Pontiac, Saab, and Saturn), producing 5 millionvehicles and $94 billion in revenue in 1998; (ii) GM Europe (Cadillac, Chevrolet, Isuzu, Opel, Saab, andVauxhall), 2 million vehicles and $25 billion in revenue; (iii) GM Asia Pacific, 150,000 vehicles and $3billion revenue; and (iv) GM Latin America, Africa, and Mid-East, 500,000 vehicles and $7 billion revenue.GM spun off Delphi Automotive Systems in mid-1999, and as a separate entity it focuses on manufacturingautomotive components/systems; revenues are approximately $30 billion.

ENVIRONMENTAL DIRECTIONS

Initial discussions were centered on the life-cycle inventory (LCI) performed by the United StatesAutomotive Materials Partnership Life-Cycle Assessment Special Topics Group (USAMP/LCA). Many ofthese results of this LCI are described in the Proceedings of the SAE Total Life Cycle Conference that washeld in 1998 in Graz, Austria. The LCI was jointly performed by individuals from GM, Ford, Chrysler, AA(Aluminum Association), AISI (American Iron and Steel Institute), and the APC (American PlasticsCouncil). The LCI was performed on a generic 1995 mid-size vehicle (Chevrolet Lumina, Dodge Intrepid,and Ford Taurus), and the vehicle was organized into six systems (powertrain, suspension, HVAC, electrical,body, and interior). For each part within the vehicle, the material type and mass were identified. The genericvehicle had a mass of 1523 kg, used gasoline as a fuel source, had a fuel efficiency of 23 mpg (city 20 andhighway 29 mpg), and had a service life of 120,000 miles. The following life-cycle stages were included inthe study: (i) raw material acquisition/processing, (ii) part and sub-assembly manufacturing, (iii) vehicleassembly, (iv) use, and (v) disposition. For each life-cycle stage, data on the following characteristics werecollected: energy usage, water consumption, air emissions (e.g., particulates, CO2, and NOx), water emissions(e.g., oils/greases and metals), solid wastes, and raw materials consumption. Key findings of the LCIinclude:

• Throughout the entire vehicle life cycle nearly 1000 GJ of energy is consumed and 2900 kg of solidwaste is generated.

• The usage stage of the vehicle life cycle contributes 84% of the energy, 94% of the CO, 90% of the NOx,62% of the SOx, and 91% of the non-methane hydrocarbon emissions.


• The material production and manufacturing stages of the life cycle have the following associatedenvironmental burdens: 14% of the energy, 65% of the particulates, 94% of the water-borne metals, and67% of the solid waste.

• The disposition stage of the life cycle has small environmental consequences, the exception being that7% of the solid waste is produced at this stage.

• About 1400 kg of the solid waste is produced (roughly 80% from powertrain, suspension, and bodymanufacture) and 160 GJ of energy is consumed (nearly 60% associated with powertrain, suspension,and body manufacture) in the material production and manufacturing stages of the life cycle.

Conversation then shifted to activities associated with vehicle end-of-life (VEOL). The Vehicle RecyclingPartnership (VRP), a consortium between GM, Chrysler, and Ford, has been examining this issue for severalyears. A number of take-back regulations (designed to reduce the amount of landfill at VEOL) areplanned/being implemented in Germany and Japan, e.g., only 5% of the vehicle to be landfilled by 2015.This represents a challenge since at present about 75% of the vehicle (mostly ferrous and non-ferrous metals)are recycled in the U.S. To meet VEOL targets, a number of changes must be considered, including: productconfiguration, material selection, dismantling processes, shredding processes, sorting/recovery processes, andpart reuse. The work of the VRP on the VEOL issue is reported in the Proceedings of the SAE Total LifeCycle Conference. As part of the VRP effort, a model for the material flows in the automotive industry hasbeen established. This model includes such elements as automakers, vehicle usage, vehiclemaintenance/repair, vehicle rebuild, dismantlers, shredders, and transforming/supplying industries. Themodel allows the stakeholders to understand what levels of recovery efficiency are needed for each elementin order to meet the mandated targets. In the context of VEOL, it was noted that commercial dismantlers areprofitable at recovering materials/components from used vehicles, and that in fact, GM has written updismantling instructions for their European operations based on the procedures of the dismantlers.

A number of internal efforts are underway at GM that are directed at promoting the environment. First, GMparticipates in a number of consortia/organizations with other companies and government agencies onenvironmental activities. DFE (design for the environment) guidelines were distributed to design engineerswithin GM in 1993 and DFE groups have been established within the divisions to serve as resources. Acompany-wide initiative is underway to standardize the environmental performance criteria that are beingused. A list of restricted materials has been distributed to GM suppliers, and the tier 1 suppliers have beennotified that they need to be ISO 14001 certified by the end of 2002. It is believed that the management ofenvironmental information across the supply chain represents a growing concern. It is also unclear how thespin off of manufacturing entities such as Delphi will impact the environment.

Life-cycle analysis (LCA) is gaining acceptance within GM as a tool for identifying improvementopportunities, e.g., processes with copious waste streams, high impact products, and large energy consumers.Factors being considered in the analyses include: resource depletion, energy usage, airborne emissions, ozone(both tropospheric and stratospheric), global warming, water usage, health/safety risks, and solid wastes.Several popular software tools (GaBI, SimaPro, and EcoBalance) are being used to perform the LCAs. Someof the perceived deficiencies within the existing LCA tools/framework are:

• Uncertainties and poor quality of the underlying data

• Missing data

• Large amount of time required to perform the LCA

• Spatial and temporal differences not properly reflected in the data

• Management often prefers a single number rather than multi-dimensional vector of results

• Subjective information

The systems view required to conduct the LCA represents a positive, but often overlooked, outcome of theenvironmental activity. Much work remains to more fully integrate LCA into the DFE activities and thedesign engineering processes currently being employed at GM. Also of interest would be a rapid method tocompare product/process alternatives from an environmental standpoint.


In terms of the environmental issues associated with manufacturing, the following processes are beinginvestigated: (i) machining-cutting fluid concerns, (ii) part cleaning-wastewater generation, (iii) casting, and(iv) painting. Much discussion then ensued on painting processes. Specifically, the pre-coating of the steelwas identified as one desirable solution to some of the painting-related concerns. Steel coils delivered in acoated/primed form may offer the following advantages: improved corrosion resistance, reducedenvironmental burden, reduced paint shop investment, lower losses to rust/stain, and reduction in stampingprocess lubricants. Of course, the use of pre-coated/primed steel sheet in lieu of painting has a number oftechnical challenges: development of appropriate coating formulation, suitability for welding and formingoperations, corrosion protection, adhesion properties, color matching, and compatibility with existingsystems.


Site: Interface Americas, Inc.P.O. Box 1503, Orchard HillLaGrange, GA 30241

Date: June 6, 2000

WTEC Attendees: T. Gutowski (report author), B. Bras, C. Murphy

Hosts: David H. Gustashaw, VP Engineering

INTRODUCTION

Interface Americas is part of the international company Interface Inc., with operations in Europe, Asia andthe Americas and annual sales of $1.3 billion. Interface Inc. is a recognized leader in the worldwidecommercial interiors market, offering floor coverings, fabrics, interior architectural products and specialtychemicals. The company is the world’s largest manufacturer of modular carpets and also providesspecialized carpet replacement, installation and maintenance services through its Re:Source Americas servicenetwork. Interface is also a leading producer of interior fabrics and upholstery products and producesraised/access flooring systems. The company produces adhesives and chemicals used in various rubber andplastic products, offers Intersept, a proprietary antimicrobial used in a variety of interior finishes, andsponsors the Environsense Consortium in its mission to address workplace environment issues.

Much of the motivation for Interface’s position as an industrial leader in environmental responsibility comesfrom the company’s founder, chairman and chief executive officer Ray C. Anderson. The companyphilosophy and operating guidelines were clearly and enthusiastically presented to us by David Gustashaw,vice president for engineering. The company takes a sensible “systems” approach to efficiency which cantranslate into both environmental responsibility and economic advantage.

A key feature of the systems approach is to know both where you are and where you want to go. Thisrequires the use of metrics that are both accessible and easy to understand. For many companies, the keymetric is cost, but there are lots of examples where local cost optimization can lead to system inefficiency.The right metrics proposed by Dave Gustashaw are: (1) mass balance, (2) energy balance, and (3) cost.According to Gustashaw a focus on the first can often incorporate the second and the third. This simplifiedapproach allows a company to know its “gas mileage” and to get everyone working in the same direction.Knowing where you are on a systems level is extremely important.

Interface then builds on this knowledge. Their systems approach involves (1) quantification (metrics), (2)qualification, and (3) symbiosis. The idea is that symbiosis with nature will be good for the customer as wellas all other stakeholders. Hence, Interface does not just sell carpet but attributes which are in the best interestof the entire system. This approach directs attention to previously ignored opportunities, for exampleattention to both air and water usage, an emphasis on increasing the product residence time with thecustomer, and a score of other details that will improve mass, energy and cost.

A good example of a product that embodies this approach is the Solenium carpet. Designed to reduce “mass”consumption, and therefore contribute to sustainability, this carpet has enhanced style and performance. Thisresults in a 35% reduction in material intensity. To achieve this goal the company had to abandon theconventional tufting approach and pursue a different technology. They achieved their goal by designing andfabricating a completely new product using weaving technology.

TOUR OF PRODUCTION FACILITIES

On the tour we were led through the steps for the production of woven and tufted floor coverings. The majorproduction steps are (1) incoming raw materials and warehousing, (2) yarn preparation, (3) tufting, (4)shearing, (5) finishing, and (6) packaging. During the tour we saw numerous examples of process


improvements to reduce mass and energy consumption, and to reduce cost. These included energy-efficientoven technology, reductions in air and water consumption, and solar panels.


Site: IBM5600 Cottle RoadSan Jose, CA 95193



Hosts: Wayne Young, Sr. Engineer, Environmental ProgramsJim Dumanowski, Sr. Engineer, Environmental ProgramsRaymond T. Wynn, Program Manager, Environmental Programs

INTRODUCTION

Discussions included policies, management, goals and accomplishments at the San Jose plant site, whichdesigns hard disc drives and other storage devices. General guidelines for environmental policy areestablished at corporate headquarters in concert with manufacturing divisions; a global view is incorporatedwhenever manufacturing includes diverse locations.

EBM ACTIVITIES

Environmental policy dates back more than 25 years and now is encompassed in its technology forsustainable world policy. This policy has encouraged expenditures in product design and manufacturingequipment aimed at reduced energy consumption, reduced emissions from manufacturing processes, andreuse and recycling programs. Direction and dissemination of IBM’s vision and goals is accomplishedthrough the Corporate Environmentally-Conscious Product program (ECP) that encourages “design forenvironment” at IBM and its global supplier base. Metrics include products with upgradability to extendproduct life; products with re-use and recyclability; products that can be safely disposed at end of productlife; products which contain and use recycled materials; and products that, through improved efficiencies,reduce energy consumption. Development of new materials and processes in sputtered coatings versusplatings, using glass instead of aluminum substances, etc., have made remarkable contributions to thereduction of toxic waste and emissions. ECP metrics also include reducing the amount of manufacturingscrap, IBM-owned end-of-life machines and customer-returned equipment that IBM could send to landfills.In 1999, of the more than 59,000 tons of such waste, the company sent less than 3.7 percent to landfills.Additionally, increased recycling techniques achieved high enough quality levels that 100% of its IBM 6893Intellistation ProE units could be converted from virgin plastic to recycled plastic.

A major thrust and achievement has been ISO 14000 accreditation for all IBM plants and corporate facilitiesby the end of 1998.

Furthermore, IBM managers believe that courses involving environmental attributes for products should beinstituted at all universities.


Site: Johnson Controls Inc.Automotive Systems Group49200 Halyard DriveP.O. Box 8010Plymouth, MI 48170

Date: June 16, 2000

WTEC Attendees: T. Gutowski (report author), D. Bauer, C. Murphy, T. Piwonka, J. Sutherland

Hosts: George A. Mileskiy, Director of EnvironmentEd Delahanty, Chief Engineer, Product Development

INTRODUCTION

Johnson Controls Inc. is a $16 billion (sales) company primarily in the automotive systems and controlsmarkets. We met with the Automotive Systems Group (ASG), whose major products are completeautomotive interior design and manufacturing, and batteries. JCI provides interior systems to virtually allmajor automobile manufacturers worldwide, and they are the world’s largest battery manufacturer, sellingboth to OEMs and to the after market.

As a first tier automotive supplier operating in major automotive markets worldwide, JCI is in a uniqueposition, subject to many different OEM and governmental requirements and specifications. An example ofthis effect is the multiple company-specific, banned-chemical “black lists.” JCI’s approach, when possible,is to produce a master list to apply to all customers. This type of solution is in the spirit JCI mentioned to uson several occasions—their goal is to meet or exceed their customers requirements and expectations.

PRESENTATION ON BUSINESS OPERATING SYSTEM

George Mileskiy, Johnson Controls Director for Environment, presented Johnson Controls Inc.-ASG’sambitious plan to implement a new business operating system (BOS). This plan presents a uniqueopportunity for Johnson Controls to integrate their commitment to the environment into their BOS. Animportant element of this system is to put in place one global environmental management system (EMS) thatwould satisfy ISO 14001. (Note that several Johnson Controls facilities currently hold ISO 14001certification under independent systems that will be converted.) Johnson Controls is also discussing how towork within the supply chain to help their suppliers implement EMSs that will further ensure improvedenvironmental performance and compliance overall. The BOS-based EMS, which represents a commonoperating system for all of Johnson Controls sites around the world, represents a very ambitious programwhich deserves attention and follow up. It has eight basic components, including the development of policyand processes, the identification and control of safety hazards and environmental aspects, compliance toregulatory requirements and internal standards, emergency and contingency planning and control, attention tomeasurables, objectives and targets, a component for education and training, attention to communication, andfinally audit management review and systems assessment. The plan is integrated into engineering,leadership, and purchasing, but pays special attention to manufacturing because of the need and urgency ofthe issues in manufacturing plants. However, at the same time it shows sensitivity to the potential disruptionto lean operations. Of particular importance is the realization that full implementation of health, safety andenvironmental issues will come about only when they are integrated into all of the key parts of business, andwhen they are tied directly with purchasing decisions. At the same time, there is an awareness of the need todemonstrate leadership and guidance to the smaller companies within the supply chain. JCI-ASG hasdeveloped assistance programs to help offset some of the potential disruption and cost impact that health,safety and environmental requirements may impose on their less-developed tier 2 and tier 3 suppliers.


PRESENTATION ON DESIGN FOR THE ENVIRONMENT

In a letter from John M. Barth, the President and Chief Operating Officer for Johnson Controls Inc., thecompany’s commitment to protect the environment is clearly articulated. To this end, the company hasdeveloped a strategy and practices to meet their high environmental standards. They base many aspects oftheir environmental management system and design for the environment approach on the U.S. EPA “Designfor the Environment Approach” document dated March 1999. This new commitment systematizes previousefforts and focuses attention through business practices, processes and review. They do this in particular byintegrating environmentally conscious practices into their new product launch system. Components of DFEinclude design for environmental manufacturing, design for environmental packaging, and design fordisposal and recyclability. Several examples of environmentally friendly materials and processes wereshared with us. These include ECO-COR, a door material that includes renewable natural fiber andpolypropylene blend, and AcoustiCOR headliner substrate that contains post consumer recycled PET fibersand PET fiber cushions. The raw material selection strategy targets class “C” surfaces and fabric coveredparts for recycled material. They also include an internal recycling plan.

Although not mentioned during our visit, a trip to JCI’s Web page will reveal that they are also one of theworld’s largest battery manufacturers. Batteries are one of the most highly recycled of all products,obtaining recycling levels on the order of 90% and higher. Battery acid is recycled by neutralizing it intowater or converting it to sodium sulfate for laundry detergent, glass and textile manufacturing. The plastic isrecycled by cleaning the battery case, melting the plastic and re-forming it into uniform pallets. The lead,which makes up 50% of every battery, is melted, poured into slabs and purified.


Site: MBA Polymers, Inc.500 West Ohio AvenueRichmond, CA 94804URL: http://www.mbapolymers.com


WTEC Attendees: C. Murphy (report author), D. Bauer, E. Wolff

Host: Michael (Mike) B. Biddle, CEO and President

BACKGROUND

MBA Polymers was formed in 1994 by Michael Biddle and Laurence Allen in order to expand research inthe area of plastics recycling and to develop a commercially viable process for recovering plastics frommixed waste streams. Several of the company’s key personnel are pioneers in the area of plastics recyclingand were instrumental in the establishment of a plastics recycling technology group at Dow Chemical prior tothe founding of MBA Polymers. The MBA Polymer facility includes a 90,000 square foot state-of-the-artresearch and commercial recycling operation. Funding has come from grants and research projectssponsored by industry (including automotive, electronics, and electrical), the American Plastics Council, andgovernment agencies (including DoE, DoC, and EPA). Most recently the company raised equity funding forits commercialization from American Industrial Partners and the Silicon Valley Band of Angels. Theemphasis at MBA Polymers is on developing automated processes for plastics separation. The company isclosely aligned with current efforts in the area of electronic products recycling, including participation inIEEE’s International Symposium on Electronics and the Environment, the EPA-sponsored StakeholdersDialogue on Thermoplastics Recycling (managed by Tufts University), DOE’s National ElectronicsRecycling Center, and DOD’s DEER2 program (Demanufacturing of Electronic Equipment for Reuse andRecycling).

MEETING

Problem Identification

MBA Polymers estimates that there are between 15 and 20 billion pounds of engineering thermoplasticsavailable for recycling each year. These high performance plastics are melted at relatively high temperaturesand formed into components for many products, especially for the automobile and electronics industries. It isestimated that there are four billion pounds of total plastics per year from the automotive sector, and three tofour billion pounds from electrical and electronics products.

Engineering plastics melt at a wide range of temperatures, and temperatures significantly in excess of themelting temperature can result in loss of impact strength and elongation for a particular type of plastic.Consequently, when commingled plastics are remelted in the recycling process, they tend to result either in aproduct with degraded mechanical properties (from overheating) or lumps (from the portions that areunderheated). In addition, some plastics, such as PVC, tend to “poison” the mixture since the PVC degradeseasily and one of the degradation products is HCl, which promotes the degradation of other plastics and cancause corrosion of processing equipment. Consequently, recycling of engineering plastics for use in high-end applications requires that they be sorted.

MBA Polymers conducted a study which showed that neither manual nor automated sorting of large pieces iseconomical (Aroloa, Allen, and Biddle 1998). The techniques evaluated included visual sorting (e.g., generalappearance, use of molders labels), benchtop spectroscopy, and automatic spectroscopy-based processes.None of these methods resulted in a stream with the desired levels of purity and cleanliness. In addition, it isnot economical to ship large pieces of plastic since the amount (weight) of material that can be shipped on atruck as whole parts is as much as 10 times less than if it is granulated. MBA’s model, therefore, says that


plastic should be densified (ground up) prior to shipping, and that sorting should take place on small (<1 cm2)pieces of plastic.

A number of groups have developed sorting techniques for granulated thermoplastic based on densitydifferences. While density separation provides a first-order sorting solution, additional processing is requiredin order to get relatively pure material streams. This is because the mean densities for different plastic typesare very similar, but the density distribution for a given plastic type is relatively large and is influenced byfillers and other agents that are not direct functions of the specific polymer. Consequently, there issignificant overlap in density distributions between the different thermoplastics.

As long as the material remains homogeneous, use and remelt do not appear to adversely affect themechanical properties of engineering thermoplastics, as shown by several studies including one conducted byDow Chemical (Biddle and Christy 1993). Consequently, the challenge is to create a homogeneous stream.This includes removing contamination (adhesives, paints, metal, etc.) as well as minimizing the amount ofcommingling in the plastics.

Current Activities

The targeted source materials for MBA polymers are those used by the electronics industry, in part becausethese are the most readily available, and include high-impact polystyrene (HIPS), polycarbonate (PC),acrylonitrile-butadiene-styrene (ABS), and blends of PC and ABS. Flame retardant ABS and HIPS areincluded. MBA also recycles other engineering plastics such as polyphenylene oxide (PPO) and nylon.

Size reduction and liberation is a two to three step proprietary process. Whole loose parts can be processedat a rate of between 2000 and 5000 pounds per hour, primarily due to feed rate limitations; bales of parts orshredded chunks can be handled at rates of between 8000 and 10,000 lb/hr depending upon the material (e.g.,PC is much harder to grind than HIPS). Incoming material is ground to pieces of several millimeters in orderto be compatible with extruders. If the pieces could be ground a little larger, it would be easier to do colorseparation. The subsequent separation process can handle 6000 to 8000 lb/hr with variations in ratedependent upon composition. MBA separates granulated plastic and removes non-plastic materials using ahighly proprietary, multi-stage process that is in part based on density. The specific process flow may varydepending upon the constituents of the incoming stream. Some color sorting is done, which improves theprice by a few cents per pound. MBA does not use a chemically based solution as does Argonne NationalLabs, where ABS and HIPS are separated using a froth flotation process that relies on an acid pre-treatmentto accentuate differences in surface tension.

Needs and Concerns

Mike Biddle believes that MBA Polymers has a good technical solution to separation of engineering plasticsfor recycling. He believes that the two biggest missing pieces are the means to generating economies of scale(creating significant volumes of uniform feedstock) and economic transportation. It also appears that themajority of computer and electronic equipment is being sent to third world countries today for recycling,making it very difficult to find sufficient sources of plastics to reach the economies of scale necessary tomake recycling cost-effective.

Flame retardants (FR) are an issue for ABS and HIPS. For example, it is very difficult to test for specifictypes of brominated additives. Some types of brominated additives are considered more problematic thanothers, but all bromine-containing ABS or HIPS are lumped together as FR-ABS or FR-HIPS. This limits thesale of recycled ABS and HIPS to use in products that will not be distributed in Europe. In separate phoneconversations with engineers at IBM and Dell, the author has found that this is a major deterrent for usingrecycled ABS. GE Plastics has a phosphorous-based flame retardant, but it is more expensive than the morecommonly used halogenated varieties, and it does not yet appear in most post-consumer streams.

High levels of metal contamination slow down most processes. MBA is working to make the co-recovery ofmetals and plastics more efficient. Large amounts of stainless steel currently pose the biggest challenge.


It would be helpful if there were a methodology for determining the properties of a plastics mixture withoutmaking a 1000-pound batch and testing it. The combination of an in-line mid-IR spectrometer and an XRFmight work, but it would have to be cost effective. In addition to characterizing the mix, it is important toidentify potential contaminants that might “poison” the final product.

Closed-loop recycling is a challenge because grades and types of plastics are changed so frequently by themolders and because there is such a significant amount of variability. These changes are typically made inresponse to price fluctuations for raw materials. OEMs also have specifications that may be much tighterthan actual tolerances. Opening up specifications might make it easier to use recyclate.

EPA’s Buy Recycled program and other preferential procurement programs are helping to increase thedemand for recycled materials. General Motors claims that they have loosened requirements to allow formore recycled content. However, there is still a great deal of work to be done in the area of marketdevelopment.

Mike Biddle believes that there needs to be a more organized effort at the government level in the area ofelectronics recycling because so many agencies are funding similar projects. He suggests that one of theroles that NSF might play is in supporting curriculum development in the area of design for recycling. Moregenerally, he advocates development of a curriculum supporting a holistic approach that integratesenvironment, business, economics, and design.

REFERENCES

Aroloa, D.F., L.E. Allen, and M.B. Biddle. 1998. Evaluation of mechanical recycling options for electronic equipment.Proc., IEEE International Symposium on Electronics and the Environment. May. p. 187-191.

Biddle, M.B and M.R. Christy. 1993. Here today, here tomorrow: Challenges of recycling engineering thermoplastics.Proc., IEEE International Symposium on Electronics and the Environment. May. p. 194-202.

(There have been over 20 papers published by MBA personnel in this area.)


Site: Micro Metallics Corp. (Noranda Inc.)1695 Monterey HighwaySan Jose, CA 95112



Host: Mike Mattos, Plant Manager

INTRODUCTION

Computer and consumer electronics contain substantial quantities of valuable materials that require extensiverecovery processes to separate those for further use in products.

The parent company of Micro Metallics is Noranda Inc., a global producer of metals, metals exploration, andrecycling.

EBM ACTIVITIES

Noranda’s view of recycling considers this to be a core area and aligned with its mining and materialsconversion processes. Partnerships to process, recycle, reuse, reclaim materials from electronic equipmentwere established with Hewlett-Packard, Xerox, Compaq, etc.

In addition to materials reprocessing, Micro Metallics also tests and remarkets electronic components tosecondary U.S. markets. Micro Metallics employs a significant portion of its 270 employees in the softwareand hardware evaluation of received components. Unless the OEM specifically requires completedestruction, Micro Metallics solicits bidding for its evaluated and performance capable equipment. Thiscontributes to the prolonged use and re-use so beneficial to environmental issues and adds to MicroMetallics’s profitability.

Materials crushing and separation technology at the California facility rely upon proven process technologiesfrom Noranda’s portfolio; the systems integrations know-how to specifically develop for recycling had beeninternally developed as well. Plastics and metallic materials reclaimed from components have predetermineddestinations. Metallic materials are reprocessed at Noranda’s smelters and refineries. This combination ofmaterials processing knowledge, refining capability, and partnerships with electronic manufacturers insurecommercial viability (profitability) as well.

Capacity constraints at the Micro Metallics site may result in additional capacity expansion in the near future.Technology challenges that need to be addressed are improved methods for metallic material segregation.Current methods, i.e., eddy current and magnetic fields, do not sufficiently discriminate and separate themetallic materials.

Process control through in-line diagnostics would further enhance and maintain reliability of product.


Site: National Center for Manufacturing Sciences3025 BoardwalkAnn Arbor, MI 48197-3266

Date: June 15, 2000

WTEC Attendees: T. Piwonka (report author)

Hosts: Paul D. Chalmer, Ph.D., Business Area Manager, Environmentally ConsciousManufacturing

Daniel J. Maas, Chief Technical Officer

INTRODUCTION

The National Center for Manufacturing Sciences (NCMS) is located in Ann Arbor, Michigan. It was foundedin 1984, and forms “cross-sector” consortia to study pre-competitive technology for manufacturing. Itcurrently has approximately 200 industrial members. Funding is provided by membership fees (which areassessed on a sliding scale, depending on the size of the company) and federal and state programs. Companydues currently range from $2500 to $62,500. They are contemplating broadening their funding base bylowering dues.

EBM ACTIVITIES

NCMS carries out a number of technology development programs. Much of their work involves generatingtest data that member companies share. They also manage three Environmental Protection AgencyCompliance Assistance Centers. Among current or recent projects are those on maintenance and logistics,semi-dry machining of aluminum, chromium-free and tri-valent chrome coating systems, biocide coatings forship ballast tanks (to prevent contamination of ecosystems when ballast tanks are emptied), andmolybdenum-free forging die lubricants.

Their representatives shared a number of concerns that they have about current trends in materialstechnology. They expressed doubt that composite materials would be truly amenable to economic recycling.They were also worried that current highly engineered tailored materials, such as those produced by laserdeposition of graded structures, cannot be recovered at the end of their useful life. The specific examplementioned was thermal barrier coated graded tool steels.

They also expressed deep concern that contaminants were building up in scrap materials, such that theywould eventually be unable to be recycled. To help solve this problem, they have developed a model whichcan be used to predict the eventual contaminant level after an unlimited number of iterations of recycling,given the percent contaminant in recycled material and the percent of recycled material added to virginmaterial in the feedstock. Model results indicate that it approaches a steady state. They were also worriedthat properties of new materials were, in general, not sufficiently characterized to permit them to beintroduced into production. They suggested that an evaluation of the recyclability of new materials beincluded as a part of the material development process.

One other area of concern was joining of dissimilar materials, or materials that had highly controlledstructures (such as micro-grain steels). While adhesives can join these materials, it is not clear what problemsadhesives would give during dismantling or recycling.

Dr. Chalmer and Mr. Maas expressed grave doubts that “take-back” laws would be effective in the UnitedStates, as it is against the cultural norms in this country. They wondered whether tax incentives might beused to encourage environmentally sound manufacturing and product decisions. They also were concernedabout the existence of methods of calculating the true environmental costs of pollution, and the difficulty ofknowing how far back in the supply chain it was necessary to go to achieve an accurate estimate.

255

APPENDIX F. GLOSSARY

AA Aluminum AssociationABS acrylonitrile butadiene styreneAFS American Foundrymen’s SocietyAGVs autonomous guided vehiclesAIGER American Industry/Government Emission ResearchAISI American Iron and Steel InstituteAPC American Plastics CouncilAPRA Automotive Part Rebuilders AssociationASR automotive shredder residue

BAT best available technologyBCSD Business Council for Sustainable DevelopmentBFRs brominated flame retardantsBOS business operating systemBr halogens

CAA Clean Air ActCAD computer aided designCAE computer aided engineeringCAFE corporate average fuel economyCALA computer aided life-cycle analysisCAM computer aided machiningCARB California Air Resources BoardCERP Casting Emissions Reduction ProgramCFC chlorofluorocarbonCIDI compression-ignition direct-injectionCMOS complementary metal-oxide semiconductorCMP chemical mechanical polishingCOD chemical oxygen demandCPUs central processor unitsCRADA Cooperative Research and Development AgreementCRTs cathode ray tubesCVD chemical vapor deposition

D2P design to prototypeDBDPO decabromodiphenyl oxideDCA direct chip attachDEER2 DOD’s Demanufacturing of Electronic Equipment for Reuse and Recycling programDFD design for disassemblyDFE design for the environmentDFR design for recyclingDFS design for sustainabilityDOD Department of DefenseDOE Department of EnergyDMT dimethylterephthalateDRI direct reduction ironDWI draw and wall ironing

EAF electric arc furnaceEBM environmentally benign manufacturingEC European CommissionEDIP environmental design of industrial productsEDM electrical discharge machiningEEA European Environment Agency

Appendix F. Glossary256

EEMS enhanced environmental management systemEG ethylene glycolEHS environment, health, and safetyEIAJ Electronic Industries Association of JapanELM end-of-life managementELV end-of-life vehicle directiveEMAS Eco-Management and Audit Scheme (EU)EMS environmental management systemsEOL end of lifeEP environmental priority systemEPA U.S. Environmental Protection AgencyERC engineering research centerEU European UnionECVM European Council of Vinyl ManufacturersESH environment, safety, and health

FAO Ford Automotive OperationsFEM finite element methodFhG Fraunhofer GesellschaftFIFO first in first outFMEA failure mode and effect analysisFPDs flat panel displaysFR flame retardant

HAPs hazardous air pollutantsHCl hydrochloric acidHDI high density interconnectHIPS high impact polystyrene

ICEM International Committee on Environment and ManufacturingICT information communication technology productsIPC U.S.-based trade association for the electronic interconnect industryIPPC Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control Directive (EU)ISO International Standards Organization

JEIDA Japan Electronic Industry Development AssociationJPEC Japanese PVC Environmental Affairs CouncilJSPE The Japan Society for Precision EngineeringJSTP Japan Society for Technology of Plasticity

LCA life cycle assessmentLCI life-cycle inventoryLEV Low Emission VehicleLNG liquid natural gas

MACT maximum achievable control technologyMCC Microelectronics and Computer Technology CorporationMQL minimal quantity lubrication

NAE National Academy of EngineeringNEDO New Energy and Industrial Technology Development OrganizationNGOs non-governmental organizationsNMP4 Dutch government’s fourth national policy actNVMP Nederlandse Vereniging voor Metaal- en Electro-Producenten, or the Dutch Association for

Metal and Electro-Producers

Appendix F. Glossary 257

OBDPO octabromodiphenyl oxideOEMs original equipment manufacturersOIT DOE’s Office of Industrial Technology

Pb leadPBBs polybrominated biphenylsPBDDs polybrominated disbenso dioxinsPBDEs polybrominated diphenyl ethersPBDFs polybrominated disbenso furansPBDPO polybrominated diphenyl oxidesPBS poly butylene succinatePC polycarbonatePCB polychlorinated biphenylsPCB printed circuit boardPCs personal computersPCCP pseudo-cylindrical concave polyhedralPCL poly hexano-6-lactonePE polyethylenePeBDPO pentabromodiphenyl oxidePET polyethylene terephthalatePFC perfluoro compoundPFL plan for the life cyclePHA polyhydroxyalkanoatePLA polylactidePLLA poly L-lactic acidPM particulate matterPMMA polymethyl-methacrylatePNGV Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles (U.S.)POCP Photochemical Ozone Creation PotentialPOTW publicly owned treatment worksPPO polyphenylene oxidePTHs plated through holesPVB polyvinyl butyralPWB printed wiring board

QFD quality function deploymentQFP quad flat package

RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery ActREM recyclability evaluation methodROS Regional Overslag StationROTIM return or throw in machineRTP rapid thermal processingRTM resin transfer molding

SBUs small business unitsSCRIMP Seemann Composite Resin Infusion Molding ProcessSIA Semiconductor Industry AssociationSMEs small and medium-sized enterprisesSMT surface mount technologySn-Pb tin-leadSOP small outline packageSPE Society of Plastics EngineersSULEV Super Ultra Low Emissions VehicleSUVs sport utility vehicles

Appendix F. Glossary258

TBBPA tetrabromo-bisphenol A, also referred to as TBBATCO The Swedish Confederation of Professional EmployeesTCE trichloroethyleneTFS tin free steelTNO Netherlands Organization for Applied Scientific ResearchTPI toxic potential indicatorTRI Toxic Release InventoryTSCA Toxic Substance Control ActTSOP thin small outline packageTULC Toyo Ultimate Lightweight Can

ULEV ultra-low emission vehicleUSAMP/LCA U.S. Automotive Materials Partnership Life-Cycle Assessment Special Topics GroupUSCAR U.S. Council for Automotive Research

VAMAS Versailles Project on Advanced Materials and StandardsVARTM vacuum-assisted resin transfer moldingVEC Vinyl Environmental CouncilVEOL vehicle end-of-lifeVOCs volatile organic compoundsVRP Vehicle Recycling Partnership

WEEE Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment Directive (EU)

ZEV zero emissions vehicle

JTEC/WTEC reports1 are available on the Web at http://itri.loyola.edu, or from the National Technical Information Service (NTIS),5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, VA 22161. Call for prices and availability (703-487-4650; FAX 703-321-8547).

1 Note: see the WTEC WWW server (http://itri.loyola.edu) for a list of earlier JTECH reports (1984-89) available from NTIS.

JTEC Panel Report on High Temperature Superconductivity inJapan (11/89) PB90-123126

JTEC Panel Report on Space Propulsion in Japan (8/90)PB90-215732

JTEC Panel Report on Nuclear Power in Japan (10/90) PB90-215724

JTEC Panel Report on Advanced Computing in Japan (10/90)PB90-215765

JTEC Panel Report on Space Robotics in Japan (1/91) PB91-100040

JTEC Panel Report on High Definition Systems in Japan (2/91) PB91-100032

JTEC Panel Report on Advanced Composites in Japan (3/91)PB90-215740

JTEC Panel Report on Construction Technologies in Japan (6/91) PB91-100057

JTEC Panel Report on X-Ray Lithography in Japan (10/91)PB92-100205

WTEC Panel Report on European Nuclear Instrumentation andControls (12/91) PB92-100197

JTEC Panel Report on Machine Translation in Japan (1/92)PB92-100239

JTEC Panel Report on Database Use and Technology in Japan(4/92) PB92-100221

JTEC Panel Report on Bioprocess Engineering in Japan (5/92) PB92-100213

JTEC Panel Report on Display Technologies in Japan (6/92)PB92-100247

JTEC Panel Report on Material Handling Technologies in Japan(2/93) PB93-128197

JTEC Panel Report on Separation Technology in Japan (3/93)PB93-159564

JTEC Panel Report on Knowledge-Based Systems in Japan (5/93)PB93-170124

NASA/NSF Panel Report on Satellite Communications Systems &Technology (7/93): Executive Summary (PB93-231116);Analytical Chapters (PB93-209815); Site Reports (PB94-100187)

WTEC Monograph on Instrumentation, Control & Safety Systemsof Canadian Nuclear Facilities (7/93) PB93-218295

JTEC/WTEC Annual Report and Program Summary 1993/94(3/94) PB94-155702

JTEC Panel Report on Advanced Manufacturing Technology forPolymer Composite Structures in Japan (4/94) PB94-161403

ITRI Monograph on Benchmark Technologies Abroad: FindingsFrom 40 Assessments, 1984-94 (4/94) PB94-136637

WTEC Panel Report on Research Submersibles and UnderseaTechnologies (6/94) PB94-184843

JTEC Panel Report on Microelectromechanical Systems in Japan(9/94) PB95-100244WTEC Panel Report on Display Technologies in Russia, Ukraine,and Belarus (12/94) PB95-144390

JTEC Panel Report on Electronic Manufacturing andPackaging in Japan (2/95) PB95-188116

JTEC Monograph on Biodegradable Polymers and Plastics inJapan (3/95) PB95-199071

JTEC Panel Report on Optoelectronics in Japan and the UnitedStates (2/96) PB96-152202

JTEC Panel Report on Human-Computer Interaction Technologiesin Japan (3/96) PB96-157490

WTEC Panel Report on Submersibles and Marine Technologies inRussia’s Far East and Siberia (8/96) PB96-199526

JTEC Panel Report on Japan’s ERATO and PRESTO BasicResearch Programs (9/96) PB96-199591

JTEC/WTEC Panel Report on Rapid Prototyping in Europe andJapan: Vol. I. Analytical Chapters (3/97) PB97-162564 Vol. II. Site Reports (9/96) PB96-199583

WTEC Panel Report on Advanced Casting Technologies in Japanand Europe (3/97) PB97-156160

WTEC Panel Report on Electronics Manufacturing in the PacificRim (5/97) PB97-167076

WTEC Panel Report on Power Applications of Superconductivityin Japan and Germany (9/97) PB98-103161

WTEC Workshop Report on R&D Status and Trends inNanoparticles, Nanostructured Materials, and Nanodevices in theUnited States (1/98) PB98-117914

WTEC Panel Report on Electronic Applications ofSuperconductivity in Japan (7/98) PB98-150139

WTEC Monograph on Use of Composite Materials in CivilInfrastructure in Japan (8/98) PB98-158215

WTEC Panel Report on Nanostructure Science and Technology(12/98 -- available from Kluwer Academic Publishers)

WTEC Panel Report on Global Satellite CommunicationsTechnology and Systems (12/98) PB99-117954

WTEC Panel Report on Digital Information Organization in Japan(2/99) PB99-128019

WTEC Panel Report on the Future of Data Storage Technologies(6/99) PB99-144214

WTEC Panel Report on Japan’s Key Technology Center Program(9/99) PB99-142424

WTEC Workshop on Russian R&D Activities on Nanoparticlesand Nanostructured Materials (12/99) PB99-150518

WTEC/MCC Strategic Technology Tour Report on MEMS andMicrosystems in Europe (1/2000) PB2000-104945

WTEC Panel Report on Wireless Technologies and InformationNetworks (7/2000) PB2000-105895

ISBN 1-883712-61-0

printed on recycled paper

Documents

International Technology Research Institutescienceus.org/wtec/docs/ebm.pdf · WTEC Panel on ENVIRONMENTALLY BENIGN MANUFACTURING FINAL REPORT April 2001 Timothy G. Gutowski (Panel